Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Resolution 8329 (Meyer Rd. Map)RESOLUTION NO. 8 3 2 9 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN R FAEL UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE MAP TS84-1, A 7 LOT SUBDIVISION TO BE LOCATED AT THE SOUTH SIDE OF MEYER RD. WHEREAS, a tentative subdivision map application for the development of six single family residences on the subject property was submitted; and WHEREAS, a Final EIR was prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act and City of San Rafael Environmental Review Guidelines, and certified by the Planning Commission on January 23,1990; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a hearing open to public comment on May 29, 1990 and June 12, 1990, to consider conditional approval of the tentative subdivision map application; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission on June 26, 1990, adopted a resolution approving the tentative subdivision map with conditions; and WHEREAS, Mr. Don L. Daglow on June 19, 1990, appealed the Planning Commission's approval and requested that the tentative map be denied based on the following reasons quoted and listed as Points 1 through 10 below: Point 1: That the Planning Commission certified the EIR despite inaccuracies contained within it that were pointed out by neighbors at the Public Hearings. Since the certification should not have taken place, the applicant's claim that the plan conforms to an appropriately certified EIR is inaccurate. Point 2: That the EIR and tentative map are not in compliance with the City of San Rafael General Plan. Certain provisions of the map as recently revised do not conform to City Code requirements. Point 3: That the map of where houses would be placed and where trees would be removed has been changed several times since the EIR was certified. This makes many provisions of the EIR inaccurate and useless for the enforcement of the restrictions imposed on the applicant by staff. A revised EIR is necessary for these restrictions to have any effect. Point 4: Subsequent to the approval of the EIR, the applicant discovered that a house was placed in a location that was too close to [a] stream bed to conform to city code. This house location was changed, but a separate stream bed on the property was ignored and homes are in fact planned too dose to it to conform to code. This stream drains a significant area of local hillside and moves tremendous volumes of water, as local residents have seen many times over the years; we believe the applicant -hired EIR authors ignored it because its location presents many problems to the development of the property. The subdivision map needs to be revised so no houses are placed too close to this stream as well. Point 5: Many of the changes described above occurred subsequent to public hearings before the Planning Commission. Although the Commission did accept letters from concerned residents, an appropriate public discussion of the many implications of the changes has not taken place. Point 6: The Los Angeles -style density of houses planned for Meyer Road is totally out of harmony with the surrounding neighborhood, and will reduce the area property values and thus infringe on the property rights of neighbors. Point 7: Obvious flaws in the EIR discussion of drainage and its impact on the homes directly below the site suggest that although applicant -funded improvements may improve flood control for "C" Street residents, residents directly below the property may see major damage to their properties in heavy rains. This damage could lead to lawsuits against both the developer and the City. Point 8: The EIR never considers the impact of flooding on downtown San Rafael when the new drainage system accelerates and increases the water flows from the area during storms. As we all know, even the current system overflows in heavy rains without this accelerated input; knowingly adding to the problem could result in lawsuits against the city by property owners who sustain damage. This topic was raised during the public hearings before the Planning Commission but never addressed or answered by the applicant. Point 9: The latest variation on the lot dimensions proposed by the applicant requires a variance from the minimum lot width. We believe that this shoehorning of lots onto Meyer Road is highly inappropriate and strenuously oppose the granting of such a variance. Point 10: Despite its being required by law, the EIR and all options offered by the applicant never actually consider lower density alternatives for the site, dismissing them with a single paragraph that notes that less damage would be done to the forest in such an option. Lot maps for lower density development were never presented as part of the EIR. WHEREAS, the appeal was considered by the City Council at duly noticed public hearings on August 20, 1990, November 5, 1990 and December 3 1990; and - 2 - WHEREAS, the City Council received public testimony and considered information provided by staff, at such public hearings. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of San Rafael hereby makes the following determinations and findings relating to the Points of the appeal: Point 1: That portion of the appeal relating to Point 1 is denied. The City Council finds that the appeal of the EIR was not filed in a timely manner and is therefore not valid. This finding is based on the EIR certification date of January 23, 1990, the requirement of the City's CEQA Guidelines that EIR's be appealed within five days of certification and the appeal submittal date of June 19,1990. Point 2: That portion of the appeal relating to Point 2 is denied. The City Council finds that the tentative map is consistent with the General Plan. This finding is based on the tentative map's proposed density and use which is seven residential units. This density and use is consistent with the General Plan designation for the property, Hillside Residential, which permits four to seventeen residential units based on an allowed density of .5 to 2.0 units per acre on this 8.5 acre site. The City Council further finds that the tentative map is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance. This finding is based on data in the City Council and Planning Commission hearing record indicating that the lot sizes are consistent with the R -1-B-1 (Single Family; 20,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size) and R -1-B-2 (Single Family; 10,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size) zoning on the property as well as the use and site development standards of both zoning districts. The City Council further finds that the tentative map is consistent with the Subdivision Ordinance. This finding is based on data in the City Council and Planning Commission hearing record, including Planning Department reports, demonstrating with analysis that the tentative map and the conditions applied by the Commission are consistent with the subdivision ordinance. The City Council further finds that the tentative map as approved by the Planning Commission is consistent with the Slope Ordinance based on the conformity of the lot sizes with the required lot sizes specified by the ordinance. Point 3: That portion of the appeal relating to Point 3 is denied. The City Council finds that the appeal of the EIR was not filed in a timely manner and is therefore not valid. This finding is based on the EIR certification date of January 23, 1990, the requirement of the City's CEQA Guidelines that EIR's be appealed within five days of certification and the appeal submittal date of June 19, 1990. The City Council further finds that the tentative map is consistent with the certified EIR. This finding is based on data in the Planning Commission and City Council hearing record including a letter from Clinton Kellner, Ph.D., a consultant who analyzed riparian impacts in the EIR, stating that the stream setbacks on the tentative map are - 3 - consistent with setbacks recommended in the EIlZ. This finding is also based on the City Council's analysis of the EIR and the tentative map and the Planning Department's recommendation that differences between the map reviewed in the EIR and the map approved by the Planning Commission are the result of changes made to incorporate mitigation measures recommended by the EIR. Point 4: That portion of the appeal relating to Point 4 is denied. The City Council finds that the tentative map as approved by the Planning Commission is consistent with General Plan policy NE -17 which is the City policy requiring setbacks from creeks and drainage ways. This finding is based on the definitions in NE -17 which identify the streams on the project site as drainage ways. NE -17 requires that drainageway setbacks shall be established through individual project review based on factors specified in the policy. The hearing record, the EIlZ and testimony by Planning Department staff document that the setbacks were designed individually to incorporate all of the factors in NE -17. Point 5: That portion of the appeal relating to Point 5 is denied. The City Council finds that no changes have been made to the approved map since it was reviewed by the Planning Commission. This finding is based on the City Council's visual inspection of the tentative map and the testimony of Planning Department staff. Based on the hearing record at the Planning Commission and the City Council, the Council finds that the public discussion of the project was long, thorough and complete. Point 6: That portion of the appeal relating to Point 6 is denied. The City Council finds that the density of the tentative map is consistent with the surrounding neighborhood. This finding is based on testimony by Planning Department staff on page 8 of the August 20, 1990 staff report demonstrating that the tentative map would put five homes on 1000 feet of Meyer Road frontage compared to six homes currently located on 700 feet of frontage extending eastward on Meyer Road from the project boundary to the road's terminus at Southern Heights Boulevard. The staff report also documented that ten homes exist on Southern Heights Boulevard on 1000 feet of roadway extending south from the intersection with Meyer Road. Point 7: That portion of the appeal relating to Point 7 is denied. The City Council finds that the appeal of the EIR was not filed in a timely manner and is therefore not valid. This finding is based on the EIR certification date of January 23, 1990, the requirement of the City's CEQA Guidelines that EIR's be appealed within five days of certification and the appeal submittal date of June 19, 1990. The City Council further finds that data and analysis in the hearing record support the conclusion that development of the project as approved by the Planning Commission will not result in flood damage to immediate downstream properties. This analysis includes - 4 - calculations on page 9 of the August 20, 1990 staff report to the Council estimating that post development runoff will be eight percent greater than existing conditions and testimony from Public Works staff that existing natural and built drainage ways have capacity to accommodate this increase without overflowing. Point 8: That portion of the appeal relating to Point 8 is denied. The City Council finds that the appeal of the EIR was not filed in a timely manner and is therefore not valid. This finding is based on the EIR certification date of January 23, 1990, the requirement of the City's CEQA Guidelines that EIR's be appealed within five days of certification and the appeal submittal date of June 19, 1990. The Council further finds that data in the hearing record of the Planning Commission and City Council supports the conclusion that development of the project as approved by the Planning Commission will not result in flooding in the Downtown area. This finding is based on data and analysis in the Final EIR, including November 20, 1989 correspondence by Schwartz-Waag calculating that post -development runoff in the project watershed will be .2% greater than pre - development conditions. This analysis also demonstrates that this increased runoff would occur before similar increases in more distant parts of the watershed thereby reducing flooding impacts from pre - development conditions. Point 9: That portion of the appeal relating to Point 9 is denied. The City Council finds that the tentative map as approved by the Planning Commission is consistent with the minimum lot width requirements of the Subdivision and Slope Ordinances. This finding is based on the analysis on page 11 of the August 20, 1990 staff report to the City Council which compares the proposed lot areas and widths to the areas and width required by the Ordinances. This analysis shows that each proposed lot exceeds the required dimensions. Point 10: That portion of the appeal relating to Point 10 is denied. The City Council finds that the appeal of the EIR was not filed in a timely manner and is therefore not valid. This finding is based on the EIR certification date of January 23,1990, the requirement of the City's CEQA Guidelines that EIR's be appealed within five days of certification and the appeal submittal date of June 19, 1990. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the following conditions of approval are amended to read as follows in response to the appeal: (o.) The proposed off-site drainage improvements are approved in concept only. Improvement plans for the proposed storm drain along C Street shall include extension between Wolfe Avenue and Octavia Street and shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to recordation of the project final map. - 5 - (aaa) All trees to be removed during the installation of subdivision improvements shall be marked in the field prior to approval of the final map. The Planning Department shall be provided 20 working days lead time to inspect the proposed tree removal and to notify adjacent property owners. At the time of this inspection, all areas of proposed grading shall be clearly marked. All trees to be removed during the construction of individual homes shall be marked in the field prior to submittal of Environmental and Design Review permit applications. Any trees intended to be saved which are removed or damaged during grading and construction shall be replaced with like trees at a ratio of 2:1. Replacement oak trees shall be 24 inch box size; all other species shall be 48 inch box size. The requirement for tree replacement shall be recorded with the conservation easement. (xx) All homes to be constructed shall be subject to Design Review by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission. Design parameters shall include: 1. Conformance with the scale of homes in the surrounding area, which may limit building footprint size; 2. A minimum amount of tree removal. For each tree removed, the proposed landscaping plan shall include at least two replacement trees of an appropriate species. 3. Use of tinted glass and large roof overhangs to reduce glare may be required; 4. The architecture of each residence shall be designed in a stepped, hillside homestyle which conforms to the natural terrain, and minimizes grading to the greatest extent possible. The designs shall conform to the City's Hillside Standards currently under preparation; 5. Homes and structures proposed on lots 2,3,4 and 5 shall not exceed one story in elevation as viewed from Meyer Rd.; 6. A maximum height of two full stories is encouraged; 7. Retaining walls shall be designed and constructed in an attractive manner which blends with natural color of existing vegetation and is compatible with exterior building materials of the homes on each lot. Where masonry walls are necessary for grading purposes, they shall be screened from off-site view; 8. Brown/green earthtone exteriors shall be required to blend with surroundings; 9. Natural wood siding materials shall be required; 10. Applications for Design Review shall include a photographic study accurately demonstrating the visual impact of the proposed architecture from viewing points as determined by the Planning Department. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the following conditions of approval are added to the tentative map as approved by the Planning Commission and as amended by the City Council: (ii) All on- and off-site public improvements and all common on-site drainage improvements shall be constructed and determined by the Public Works Director to be complete and consistent with the approved tentative and final map prior to issuance of the first building permit to construct homes. On- and off-site public improvements and common on-site drainage improvements shall not be approved or constructed in phases. BE FURTHER RESOLVED that the property lines of Lot 2, 3 and 4 shall be adjusted to achieve a 50 foot drainageway setback. The City Council makes the following findings to support an exception to the lot width requirements of the Slope Ordinance for Lot 4: 1. There are special circumstances and conditions affecting the property: the reduced lot width would permit a 50 foot setback from the drainageway which the City Council deems to be in the public interest; 2. The granting of the exception is necessary to preserve the substantial property right of the property owner to develop the property in compliance with the City's General Plan policies, including policies requiring environmentally sensitive design; 3. The granting of the exception will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other properties in the vicinity in which the property is located. The average size of the remaining lots in the subdivision substantially exceeds the requirements of the slope ordinance, which effectively offsets any impact which might result from the proposed exception. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby approves Tentative Map TS84-1 subject to the conditions of approval attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. I, JEANNE M. LEONCINI, Clerk of the City Council 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 Tuesday, January 22. 1991 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Boro, Breiner, Shippey, Thayer & Mayor Mulryan NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None JE Edd. LEONC I, City Clerk mm EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR MEYER ROAD SUBDIVISION AS ADOPTED BY SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL 1/22/91 Public Works (a.) Prior to recordation of the final map engineered improvement plans shall be submitted for construction of all public and common area improvements. (b.) Prior to approval of completion and acceptance of subdivision improvements Mylar "As Builts" for all subdivision improvements shall be submitted. (c.) A standard subdivision agreement shall be executed by the applicant for the construction of all public and private site improvements prior to the recordation of the final map. (d.) An engineer's estimate shall be submitted for the cost of the proposed improvements. The estimate shall be subject to approval by the City Engineer. (e.) Based on the engineer's estimate, bonding or other approved security shall be supplied to insure the completion of all site improvements. (f.) Prior to the acceptance of the final map, plan check and inspection fees shall be paid based on the engineer's estimate. (g.) The grading plans shall show all proposed and existing contours as well as proposed drainage improvements. (h.) A level "B" soils report shall be submitted with the improvement plans. This report shall be submitted to address the conditions of approval and shall include improvements in response to the mitigation requirements of the Herzog Review dated May 4, 1989. (i.) All cut and fill slopes shall be contour graded and rounded to provide a natural looking slope. (j.) All earthwork shall be done under the direction of a soils engineer and a final report shall be submitted prior to acceptance of the work. (k.) Grading and drainage work shall be reviewed and approved by the project soils engineer. (1.) An erosion control plan shall be submitted for approval by the City Engineer. (m.). Erosion control plans shall show methods of controlling erosion and siltation during and after final grading. (n.) As directed by the City Engineer, downstream drainage facilities shall be cleared of all silt emanating from the project during the first winter. (o.) The proposed off-site drainage improvements are approved in concept only. Improvement plans for the proposed storm drain along C Street shall propose extension between Wolfe Avenue and Octavia Street and shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to recordation of the project final map. (p.) The offsite drainage improvements shall be constructed prior to the issuance of any grading permits. (q.) The improvement plans shall show all existing and proposed drainage facilities. (r.) Each lot shall be constructed to properly drain to the street or to an established drainage facility. (s.) Where site drainage from a lot must cross adjacent parcels prior to reaching an established drainage way easements across adjacent parcels must be created for drainage purposes. (t.) Site drainage from each lot must be piped or otherwise conveyed across adjacent property. Collected drainage from roof leaders and foundation drains may not be outlet on hillsides. (u.) The proposed headwall shall be constructed with sloped grate headwall as well as upstream post configurations. Headwalls shall be constructed with easy access for maintenance. (v. ) The drainage system shall be televised and mandrel tested prior to acceptance of the work. (w.) All drainage improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the "Uniform Construction Standards for the Cities and County of Marin". (x.) Drainage easements shall be created for the pipe crossings at Meyer Road. These easements shall be shown on the final map and continuous to C Street. (y.) The existing drainage ditch above C Street shall be cleaned to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. (z.) The improvement plans shall show the location of all existing and proposed sanitary sewer facilities. (aa.) All sanitary sewer easements shall be a minimum of 10 feet in width. (bb.) Sanitary sewer plans shall be reviewed and approved by the San Rafael Sanitation District. (cc.) All gravity sanitary sewers shall be air and mandrel tested and televised prior to acceptance of the work. (dd.) The improvements plans shall show the horizontal and vertical alignment of the private driveways. This shall be subject to the approval of the Fire Dept. and City Engineer. (ee.) The width of the private driveways from C Street/Wolfe Avenue shall be acceptable to the Fire Department and City Engineer. (ff.) The southerly edge of Meyer Road shall be improved so that it serves as a drivable surface. (gg.) All utility services shall be underground. (hh.) The improvement plans shall be reviewed and signed by each of the utility companies. (ii) All on- and off-site public improvements and all common on-site drainage improvements shall be constructed and determined by the Public Works Director to be complete and consistent with the approved tentative and final map prior to issuance of the first building permit to construct homes. On- and off-site public improvements and common on-site drainage improvements shall not be approved or constructed in phases. Fire Department (jj.) The minimum driveway width shall be not less than 16 feet wide unobstructed. (kk.) The driveway shall not exceed 18% grade and be capable of accommodating fire department apparatus turning radius and turn around capabilities. W (11.) Due to the excessive driveway length, an approved driveway turnout shall be installed capable of accommodating fire department apparatus. (mm.) The net overhead vertical clearance for all access roadways and driveways shall be greater than 13 ft. 6 in. (nn.) An approved hammerhead or cul de sac turn around shall be installed and be capable of accommodating fire department apparatus. (oo.) No Parking Fire Lanes signs and curb markings shall be installed for all access roadways, parking lots and driveways as specified by the Fire Marshal conforming to Fire Prevention Std. 204. (pp.) Due to the wildland fire hazard severity interface area fire retardant roof covering is required with a minimum Class C listing. (qq.) Based on the required fire flow, an automatic residential fire sprinkler system shall be installed throughout conforming to NFPA Std. 13D as modified by the Fire Marshal. (rr.) All fire hydrants where required shall be painted by the developer/owner conforming with Fire Prevention Standards. (ss.) The nearest fire hydrant shall be located within 150 ft. from the structure and be a type Jones 3740 capable of supplying the required fire flow. (tt.) Based on the inability to ladder the side of the building to effect rescue from bedroom windows due to slope or access, approved emergency escape ladders shall be installed on at least one bedroom window in each bedroom as specified by the Fire Marshal. Planning Department (uu.) This Tentative Map shall approve a seven lot subdivision as shown on Exhibit "C" of the June 8, 1990 staff report, submitted for the Commission's June 12, 1990 meeting. NO Prior to the recordation of a Final Map, the Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions for the subdivision shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Director and City Attorney. The CC&R's shall specify the purpose of and restrictions within the Conservation Easement and provide notice to the property owner that development of the property must be in accordance with adopted conditions of the Tentative Map. The CC&R's shall also specify that any tree removal not authorized by an approved design review application is El a violation subject to legal action by the City of San Rafael. The purpose of and restrictions within the Conservation Easement shall also appear on the Final Map. (ww.) All areas of the site outside of proposed building envelopes shall be encumbered with a Conservation Easement, within which no development except the installation of access and utility/ drainage improvements may occur. All vegetation within the Conservation Easement shall remain in its natural state except where removal of invasive, non-native species is required in accordance with the project EIR mitigation measures; tree removal shall be prohibited except where, upon the conclusion of a Certified Arborist, a tree poses a threat to life or property due to poor health and such tree removal has been approved by the Zoning Administrator. (xx) All Design Review applications shall include a report from a Certified Arborist. The Arborist's report shall identify all trees which are to be removed or possibly affected as a result of the proposed development. The report shall include a specific fertilization and watering plan for each tree whose roots are cut or otherwise disturbed by construction activity. The report shall include recommendations for the construction of a fence or other barrier to protect the root system of trees adjacent to proposed buildings during the construction phase of the project. The recommendations of the Arborist shall become conditions of approval for the Design Review application. The arborist's report shall include a site plan accurately locating all trees with a trunk diameter of 4" or greater. Each such tree shall be numbered on the plan, and be identified in the field by permanently attaching a small aluminum tag bearing the tree's inventory number. The report shall identify each inventoried tree by species and size and provide an assessment of the tree's health. (yy) All homes to be constructed shall be subject to Design Review by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission. Design parameters shall include: 1. Conformance with the scale of homes in the surrounding area, which may limit building footprint size; 2. A minimum amount of tree removal. For each tree removed, the proposed landscaping plan shall include at least two replacement trees of an appropriate species. 3. Use of tinted glass and large roof overhangs to reduce glare may be required; 4. The architecture of each residence shall be designed in a stepped, hillside homestyle which conforms to the natural terrain, and minimizes grading to the greatest extent possible. The designs must conform to the City's Hillside Standards currently under preparation; 5. Homes and structures proposed on lots 2,3,4 and 5 shall not exceed one story in elevation as viewed from Meyer Rd.; 5 6. A maximum height of two full stories is encouraged; 7. Retaining walls shall be designed and constructed in an attractive manner which blends with natural color of existing vegetation and is compatible with exterior building materials of the homes on each lot. Where masonry walls are necessary for grading purposes, they shall be screened from off-site view; 8. Brown/green earthtone exteriors to blend with surroundings; 9. Natural wood siding materials; 10. Applications for Design Review shall include a photographic study accurately demonstrating the visual impact of the proposed architecture from viewing points determined by the Planning Director. (zz) No fencing shall be permitted outside of approved development envelopes. (aaa) All landscape plans shall be prepared by a landscape architect specializing in revegetation. All new landscaping shall consist of deer resistant species native to the area, and shall be selected from the following plant palette: coast redwood, hazelnut, native blackberry, fairy bells, toyon, coast live oak, black oak, California Bay, madrone, honeysuckle, wood fern, Douglas Iris, Dutchman's pipe, and snowberry. Landscape plans shall include appropriate plantings of cut banks or other areas which may be subject to erosion. Landscape Plans for Lots 2 and 7 shall include buffering of the stream setback area.. In order to reduce fire hazards, trees within 30 feet of structures shall be pruned if necessary, but not removed. Pruning may occur for limbs hanging above the residences or for limbs growing near the ground . Masses of shrubs within 30 feet of residences should be cut such that isolated clumps of shrubs remain. Any tree pruning to occur shall be indicated on the landscape plan. (bbb) All trees to be removed during the installation of subdivision improvements shall be marked in the field prior to approval of the final map. The Planning Department shall be provided 20 working days lead time to inspect the proposed tree removal and to notify adjacent property owners. At the time of this inspection, all areas of proposed grading shall be clearly marked. All trees to be removed during the construction of individual homes shall be marked in the field prior to submittal of Environmental and Design Review permit applications. Any trees intended to be saved which are removed during grading and construction shall be replaced with like trees at a ratio of 2:1. Replacement oak trees shall be 24 inch box size; all other species shall be 48 inch box size. The requirement for tree replacement shall be recorded with the conservation easement. I (ccc) Prior to grading, the area to be graded for subdivision improvements or individual site development shall be fenced. Heavy equipment shall not operate in areas beyond the limit of said fence. (ddd) All driveways to Meyer Road shall have a maximum grade of 3%. (eee) Prior to the issuance of a grading permit for subdivision improvements, the developer shall install "No Parking" signs along Meyer Road from "D" Street to the eastern extent of the site to the satisfaction of the Traffic Engineer. (fff) The driveway to any home developed on Lot 3 shall be located as far to the west as possible, and shall be subject to the approval of the City Traffic Engineer. (ggg) All development shall at a minimum meet the requirements of the 1982 Uniform Fire Code. (hhh) The existing subdrains located in the slide repair on the upper slopes of lots 2 and 7 shall be located and cleared to the satisfaction of the City Engineer by the developer prior to recordation of a Final Map. (iii) Prior to approval of a Final Map, required checkdams shall be designed and located on the subject site. Consultation with a Certified Wildlife biologist shall be required to assure the effectiveness of such dams to provide water for wildlife, reduce sedimentation, and minimize impacts on surrounding flora. (jjj) The developer shall be required to bond for eradication of all acacia and french broom from the project site. The amount of this bonding shall be as determined by the Planning and Public Works Directors, and shall be of an amount sufficient to permit a one-time eradication of all such plants from the project site by the developer and five annual follow-up eradication efforts. This amount shall be based upon the estimate of a qualified individual such as an arborist or professional landscaper. The initial eradication effort shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning and Public Works Directors prior to the issuance of the first building permit within the subdivision. Annual eradication of acacia and french broom from all unsold lots shall be the responsibility of the developer and shall occur during the months of September or October. Annual or regular eradication of such plants from lots sold by the developer shall be the responsibility of the individual property owner, and this shall be specified in the project CC&R's. Additional bonding and follow-up eradication may be required if the developer retains ownership of two or more lots beyond the initial five year period. VA (kkk.) A Traffic Mitigation fee of $682.00 per dwelling unit shall be paid for each unit at time of issuance of building permit. This is based on a fee of $682 times 1 PM peak trip per unit in September 1986 dollars (General Plan 2000 Circulation Background, page 208), and will be adjusted according to the Lee Saylor Construction Index to take into account changes in construction costs. (1990 fee, $748.00 per dwelling unit) (111.) The applicant is to comply with the conditions and policies of the Marin Municipal Water District in force at time of application for each individual building permit in order to obtain water service to the new dwellings. (mmm.) A Parkland Dedication fee of $1809.53 shall be paid for each unit at application for building permit. This fee is based upon City Ordinance #1558, and is stated in 1989 dollars and will be adjusted at time of building permit issuance. (nnn.) This subdivision is approved for two years unless renewed. Prior to expiration, the applicant may apply for an additional one year time extension.