HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Resolution 8411 (Linden Lane Appeal)RESOLUTION NO. 8 411
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL DENYING THE APPEAL OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION'S ADOPTION OF A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION AND CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF A TENTATIVE
SUBDIVISION MAP, TS89-29, FOR A FOUR LOT RESIDENTIAL
SUBDIVISION; LINDEN LANE AND NEWHALL DRIVE ("LINDEN LANE
SUBDIVISION") WILLIAM MOORHOUSE AND EDWARD NICOLAUS,
REPRESENTATIVES AND OWNERS; LINDEN LANE HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION, APPELLANTS
(AP 15-051-14)
WHEREAS, an application for a four lot residential subdivision on the
subject site was submitted; and,
WHEREAS, an environmental Initial Study and Negative Declaration
were prepared consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act;
and,
WHEREAS, on January 15, 1991, the Planning Commission of the City
of San Rafael reviewed and considered public testimony, the Initial Study, the
Negative Declaration and the staff report at a duly noticed public hearing on
the project and voted to adopt the Negative Declaration and Mitigation
Monitoring program and approve said four -lot subdivision; and,
WHEREAS, the Linden Lane Neighborhood Association appealed the
Planning Commission's approval of the Negative Declaration and tentative
subdivision map, and requested that the approval be denied based on the
following reasons quoted and listed as Points 1 through 5 below:
Point 1:
That a Master Plan should have been prepared and the Association feels that
they were misled to believe that the subject property would be one
undeveloped parcel of a three lot subdivision.
Point 2:
That there is inadequate documentation in the record to support the adoption
of a Negative Declaration, and the Planning Commission, in their approval
of the project and the adoption of the Negative Declaration, failed to consider
the visual impact of new homes on the historic resources in the area, and also
failed to consider the cumulative impacts of a house on 145 Linden Lane, part
of an earlier subdivision of the property. The appellants also contended that
mitigation measures related to off-site improvements cannot be completed
and that conditions requiring design review and mitigation measures are
contrary to the Sundstrom case.
Point 3:
That there are potential significant impacts on the environment with regard
to the impacts of geology, grading, hydrology (drainage), cultural, and traffic.
Point 4:
That the project is inconsistent with the General Plan and the site is not
physically suitable for a four lot subdivision.
Point 5:
That the Neighborhood Association would support a two -parcel
development; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council opened the public hearing on this matter
on February 19, 1991, and continued the public hearing for 30 days to the
March 18, 1991 meeting; and,
WHEREAS, on March 18, 1991, the City Council continued the public
hearing to April 1, 1991 due to late receipt of materials from the appellant;
and,
WHEREAS, on April 1, 1991, the City Council after considering public
testimony, requested the proposal be referred to the Design Review Board for
consideration regarding design review conditions of approval; and,
WHEREAS, on April 16, 1991, the Design Review Board considered the
subdivision and the Planning Commission recommended conditions of
approval and recommended revisions to the conditions of approval to the
City Council,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the San Rafael City
Council hereby makes the following determinations and findings relating to
the Points of the appeal:
0J
Point #1- Master Plan and Previous Subdivision.
That portion of the appeal relating to Point 1 is denied. The City Council
finds that the General Plan requires Master Plans for lots five acres in size or
larger. The subject parcel is only 1.75 acres in size. The staff report for the
original three -lot subdivision dated March 14, 1989, indicates that further
subdivision of the parcel will be possible. Although the staff report indicates
that the property owners did not have any plans for further subdivision at
that time, the conditions of approval state that "at any time development
occurs on parcel three, drainage improvements shall be designed and
constructed to convey all site drainage to Grand Avenue." The staff report
also states that "The conditions of approval will require that a complete Level
"C" soils report and soils engineering for each lot, and may require review by
the Geotechnical Review Board at a later date if parcel 3 is further subdivided.
Additionally, the minutes for the March 14, 1989 meeting indicate that "This
parcel is to be divided into 3 lots at this time, and possibly the large remainder
parcel will be divided further in the future." Comments made by neighbors
Alice Vipiana and Harry Scott indicate that they were aware that further
subdivision was possible. No conditions were placed on the subdivision that
would limit subdivision of the subject parcel.
Point #2 - Inadequate Documentation to Support a Negative Declaration.
That portion of the appeal relating to Point 2 is denied. The City Council
finds that the record supports the adoption of a Negative declaration. The
appellants state that the four -lot subdivision is not compatible with the
historic properties in the area, listed on the City's Historical/Architectural
Survey (8 large homes on large lots), and that development of this site should
be compatible with these dwellings. A representative of the appellant
presented several slides to City staff in order to show the negative aesthetic
impact of the proposed subdivision on these existing historic resources. The
closest proposed dwelling is approximately 135 feet from the mansion at 201
Linden Lane, and approximately 120 feet from the historic house at 202
Linden Lane. Both of these neighboring houses are screened from public
view by significant vegetation. Other significant historic houses noted by the
appellant are even more distant than the above two houses, and except for
two houses on Grand Avenue, are not contiguous to the subdivision.
Additionally, significant vegetation, elevation change, and distance do not
allow a view of the historic houses with a view of the proposed subdivision.
The visual analysis also failed to note that there are a greater number of more
modest houses in the neighborhood that were not considered in this
comparison. These smaller homes have a variety of architectural styles
which establish the character of most of the neighborhood. In addition, a new
home has recently been constructed on Newhall Drive. The proposed
development will be similar in scale to the majority of the existing residences.
The staff analysis of lot size noteed that in addition to homes located on large
lots in the area, there are a great many homes located on lots similar in size or
smaller than the eight large homes noted in the appellants material. As a
result, the neighborhood is an interesting area of varying parcel sizes as well
as varying architecture. As a result of this analysis, the proposed subdivision
has been designed to be consistent with existing development patterns in the
Dominican Neighborhood. Lots in the surrounding area of the Dominican
Neighborhood range from approximately 7,000 square feet to 65,000 square
feet. The lots in the proposed subdivision range from 13,000 to 26,000 square
feet in size, making the lots compatible in size with most of the existing lots.
The lot proposed for Newhall Drive will be the largest lot accessed from
Newhall Drive, with the exception of the mansion at end of the road (201
Linden Lane).
3
The appellant's visual presentation to staff with "sample" dwellings
superimposed into the existing topography indicated substantial tree
removal. Conditions of approval require a vegetation management plan,
conservation easements, permits for tree removal and two-for-one
replacement for tree removal. This will result in the retention of the existing
eucalyptus trees and significant numbers of new replacement trees after
dwellings are built. Retention of existing vegetation provides buffers to
mitigate visual impacts on historic structures. This visual presentation did
not accurately portray conditions as they will be built.
The appellant stated that the Planning Commission, in adopting the Negative
Declaration, failed to consider the cumulative impacts of a prior approval for
a dwelling at 145 Linden Lane, part of a previous subdivision reviewed with a
negative declaration. The house at 145 Linden Lane is not visible from the
proposed subdivision and received design review approvals. However, the
residence at 145 Linden Lane and other recent developments were considered
by staff in reviewing the current project, as staff felt that the amount of tree
removal and the scale of some other new homes are not in character with the
neighborhood. This subdivision has been designed and conditioned to
require substantial setbacks and tree retention, as well as consideration for
building mass, architectural detail and colors to mitigate these impacts.
Design Review criteria proposed by the applicant at the Planning
Commission hearing has been incorporated into conditions of approval and
additional Design Review Criteria has been added by the City Council to
insure that the scale of this project is compatible with the neighboring
dwellings.
In regard to mitigation measures requiring drainage and roadway
improvements to Newhall Lane, Section 66462.5 of the Subdivision Map Act
gives the City the ability to initiate proceedings to require interest in the land
to permit the improvements to be made.
The Negative Declaration does not specifically require the improvements, but
does require drainage improvements in the City storm drainage system
subject to Public Works Department approval. The City Engineer has stated
that drainage on Lot 4 can also be successfully dealt with by diverting it to
Linden Lane. The condition has been modified to provide this flexibility
without modifying the Negative Declaration.
The appellants cite the Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino case stating that a
mitigation measure cannot be based on a study yet to be completed. The
proposed conditions 67, 68 and 69 do not rely on a future study, as in the
Sundstrom case. An arborist report has already been prepared which
evaluates tree removal. Landscape conditions implement this report.
Condition #67 does not rely on a future study but establishes design
parameters based on staff analysis of the subject site and neighboring parcels.
The guidelines are specific as to building materials, size, colors and height. In
addition Planning Commission review will allow public review to ensure
that the measures are enforced. Building envelopes and conservation
easements further limit tree removal and provide buffers from adjacent
residences, including historic structures. These specific measures will
mitigate potential impacts.
Point #3 - Potential Significant Impacts on the Environment.
That portion of the appeal related to Point 3 is denied. The City council finds
that all potential significant impacts on the environment have been
mitigated to a level of insignificance.
Geology/Grading:
4
As stated in the February 19, staff report to the City Council, a complete
geotechnical investigation was performed for the site and reviewed by the
City's Geotechnical Review Board. Nothing was found in this investigation
which would indicate the proposed development would have an adverse
impact on the site and the stability of the area, and that the minimal grading
proposed for the driveways was acceptable from a geologic standpoint.
Hydrology:
A drainage plan to carry any additional runoff created by the project to Grand
Avenue has been reviewed and approved. A letter from Nute Engineering
states that the project can be designed so that there is no change to the water
runoff to properties located below the project. This conclusion has been
verified by the City's Public Works Department. No new information has
been presented to the City by the appellant that disputes any of the expert
documentation that has been presented.
Cultural:
The appellants have stated that there are four homes surrounding the site
that are listed on the City's Historical/Architectural Survey, and that the
character of any proposed homes for the subdivision should be in keeping
with the traditional style of these homes. Condition of approval (67) contains
13 design parameters to ensure compatibility with the neighborhood, and
condition (68) requires review by the Cultural Affairs Commission, as
discussed under Point #2. The architecture of the neighborhood is varied,
and in addition to the historic homes in the neighborhood, there are many
smaller, more modest dwellings with a variety of architectural styles. The
mitigation measures limiting the scale of the buildings providing adequate
setbacks, establishing design parameters, and requiring Cultural Affairs
review will mitigate potential impacts to historic homes.
Traffic:
The appellants have submitted a letter from the Goodrich Traffic Group
stating that safety would be compromised if one more house was built on
Newhall drive in addition to the 8 homes that Newhall Drive already serves.
This letter has been reviewed by the City's Traffic Engineer John Rumsey who
states that the street width from Grand Avenue to the proposed access point
for Lot #4 is 20 feet, more than adequate to support two-way traffic for this
low volume site. The proposed driveway to Lot #4 is at the apex of a curve
with excellent sight distance visibility of all oncoming traffic. Mr. Rumsey
does not feel that the addition of a single home on Lot #4 will create any
measurable impact on Newhall Drive.
CEQA states that a Negative Declaration shall be prepared when revisions in
the project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant would
avoid or mitigate impacts to a point where clearly no significant effects would
occur and there is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project as
revised may have a significant effect on the environment. After its review of
the documentation provided by the appellant, the Council concluded that the
appellants have not provided any substantial evidence that the project will
have a significant effect on the environment. Evidence in the record also
supports findings that the site is physically suitable for the proposed 4 -lot
subdivision.
Point #4 - General Plan Consistency.
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 the General Plan. In Point #4, the appellants state that the
proposed subdivision is inconsistent with the General Plan. The appellants
state that the visual analysis contained in the slide presentation provides
5
tangible evidence that new development will not be compatible in design
with historical structures located in the neighborhood, and will destroy the
secluded setting in which these historic homes are located. They state that
these factors make the project inconsistent with the policy direction contained
in General Plan policies LU -23 and LU -36(n).
The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan land use designation
of Low Density Residential (2 - 6.5 units per gross acre) in that the project
involves a subdivision creating four lots for single family residential
development at a density of approximately 2.8 units per acre.
The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan Policy LU -29 in that
the building envelopes have been designed to minimize tree removal for
future residences and a vegetation management plan will be submitted with
individual landscape plans to ensure the health of the vegetation on the site.
The proposed project is consistent with General Plan Policy LU -10 in that the
site has been designated in the General Plan for infill development. A traffic
study and geotechnical review has been done by the City's Traffic Engineer
and the Public Works Department has examined these documents and
determined that the site is appropriate for the proposal. The proposal is
consistent with the prevailing densities in the neighborhood and a
conservation easement will preclude any additional subdivision.
The proposed project is consistent with General Plan Policy RES -1 in that
design review conditions will insure that new development will be
harmoniously intergrated into the neighborhood in terms of design.
The proposed project is consistent with General Plan Policy LU -34 in that no
trees will be removed for the subdivision and a minimum number of trees
are proposed to be removed for future residences and grading is minimized
by project design.
The proposed project is consistent with General Plan Policy LU -35(a) in that
the project has been designed to be sensitive to the natural landscape and site
features. An arborist's report has been prepared to ensure that appropriate
trees will be maintained and planted and the subdivision has been designed
to minimize impacts to existing vegetation.
The proposed project is consistent with General Plan Policy LU -23 which
requires that new development be compatible with historically significant
buildings and areas, and that the special and recognized historic, architectural
and aesthetic value shall be preserved. The nearest historically significant
building in the area will be located at a distance of approximately 120 feet
from the nearest proposed structure, and will be screened by significant
vegetation. Design guidelines presented by the applicant have been
incorporated as conditions of approval to insure that the historic integrity of
the mansion site is recognized. As stated above, review by the Design Review
Board and the Cultural Affairs Commission will be required prior to issuance
of building permits. Additionally, a complete vegetation management plan is
required in order to retain significant vegetation on the site and replant trees
that are recognized as dying or declining. Because of these extensive and
limiting conditions, a four -lot subdivision will be no more intrusive on the
character of the neighborhood than a subdivision with a smaller number of
units.
The proposed project is consistent with General Plan Policy LU -36(n) which
encourages sensitive and compatible architecture in the vicinity of
historically significant buildings and areas, and to preserve vistas and historic
character of the neighborhoods. As above, conditions of approval have been
31
designed to ensure compatibility with the variety of architectural styles in the
neighborhood and to ensure the maintenance to the wooded setting. In
addition to the design requirements, size limits have been established for the
proposed dwellings in order to control visual impacts and impact on the
vegetation. A photographic analysis prepared by staff indicates that the area
proposed for subdivision will not be seen in the same view as any of the
historic structures because of differences in elevations and vegetation.
Point #5 - Appellants Support of a Two -Parcel Development.
The portion of the appeal relating to Point 4 is denied. The City Council finds
that the four lot subdivision is consistent with the neighborhood character
and that a two lot subdivision will not further reduce impacts. In point #5,
the appellant states that they would support a two -parcel development. Two
estate -sized houses would have a similar impact or greater impact on the
neighborhood as would four smaller homes. The visibility of these larger
homes would be greater as they would be more massive and require more
extensive grading. Tree removal would be similar, or perhaps greater because
of the increased building footprint and additional grading. Additionally, two
larger parcels would not be compatible with most of the lots and houses in
this neighborhood. As shown in the attached exhibit, most lots in the
neighborhood are either approximately the same size or smaller than the four
lots in the proposed subdivision.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the following conditions of approval
are amended to read as follows in response to the appeal:
(60) All utility services shall be underground. If any trenching is done on
the roadways, the utilities on Linden Lane and Newhall Drive shall be
undergrounded also.
(67) All homes to be constructed shall be subject to Design Review by the
design Review Board and Planning Commission. The Linden Lane
Neighborhood Association shall be noticed and consulted regarding any DRB
meetings on any proposed dwellings for the site. Design parameters shall
include:
1. Conformance with the scale of homes in the surrounding area; the
footprint or building coverage on the lots 2, 3 and 4 shall not exceed 2,500
square feet, and the building coverage on lot 1 shall not exceed 2, 200 square
feet; exceptions may be made for one story houses with Design Review Board
approval;
2. The living area shall not exceed 3,500 square feet on lots 2, 3 and 4, and
3,100 square feet on lot 1. Homes shall be a maximum of two and one-half
stories. Maximums are not guaranteed and all homes must be designed to fit
the individual lot conditions;
3. A minimum amount of tree removal. For each tree removed or
relocated, the proposed landscaping plan shall include at least three 15 gallon
replacement trees of an appropriate species unless exceptions or
modifications are approved by the DRB. If the tree removed or relocated is an
Oak or Cypress tree, the replacement species shall be the same as removed;
4. Home designs shall conform to the natural terrain and relate to site
topography in order to minimize grading. The designs must conform to the
City's Hillside Standards currently under preparation;
5. The style of the dwellings shall be varied in massing, roof type and
exterior materials to provide an individualistic character for each house yet
provide a compatibility with the existing neighborhood, gables and roof
overhangs are encouraged;
6. Two and three car garages shall be provided depending on the site size
and topography;
6
7. Pool sites and/or garden areas shall be provided only at the rear of each
lot;
8. A maximum height of 30 feet as determined by the Hillside Residential
Design Design Guidelines;
9. Brown/green or other recessive exterior colors to blend with
surroundings;
10. The exterior materials shall be primarily wood siding (boards or
shingles) with wood windows and trim. The roofs shall be a dark fire
resistive material such as concrete tile or architectural grade composition
shingles;
11. Retaining walls shall be constructed in an attractive manner which
blends 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;
12. Application for Design Review for each house shall include: (a) A
photographic study accurately demonstrating the visual impact of the
proposed architecture from viewing points determined by the Planning
Director; (b) A slope analysis and slope map; (c) A grading plan and precise
architectural drawings: (d) A plan that shows how each house relates to the
neighboring dwellings and the effect that the house has on the neighboring
backyards. (e) story poles for review by Design Review Board members at
least one week before the meeting; (e) A model of the proposed home;
13. A building stepback shall be required on the downhill elevations and
all walls facing the front property line. This stepback shall be designed in
conformance with the San Rafael Hillside Residential Design Guidelines.
(69) All landscape plans shall be prepared by a landscape architect
specializing in revegetation, and shall include as much of the native
vegetation as possible to retain the woodland atmosphere. All new
landscaping shall consist mostly of deer resistant and drought tolerant species
native to the area. Landscape plans shall include appropriate plantings of cut
banks or other areas which may be subject to erosion. 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 shrubbery remain. Any tree
pruning to occur shall be indicated on the landscape plans.
(72) The rock wall along Newhall Drive shall be retained whereever
possible to retain the present rural atmosphere of the street.
(73) The building envelope for lot 1 shall be located 45 feet from the
property line along Linden Lane; the building envelope for lot 2 shall be
located 50 feet from the property line along Linden Lane; the building
envelope for lot 3 shall be as presented for approval in the January 15, 1991
Planning Commission report; the building envelope setback for lot 4 shall
retain a minimum of 25 feet from the edge of the existing pavement area on
Newhall Drive.
(76) The hours of construction shall be limited from 7:00 a.m. until 6:00
p.m., Monday through Friday only.
(79) A parkland dedication fee of 1809.53 shall be paid for each unit prior to
recordation of the final map. This fee is based upon City Ordinance #1558,
and is stated in 1989 dollars and will be adjusted at time of recordation of final
map.
(80) This subdivision is approved for two years or until May 6, 1993 unless
renewed. Prior to expiration, the applicant may apply for an additional one
year time extension.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the San Rafael City Council hereby
makes the following additional findings relative to this matter:
E:3
1. The proposed project is consistent with the zoning classification
of R-1 in that the proposed lots meet the area and width requirements of the
City Slope Ordinance and the zoning district.
2. Approval of the proposed subdivision would not be detrimental
to the health, safety or welfare of the surrounding development in that the
potential environmental impacts have been mitigated to the point of
insignificance.
3. The proposed project is consistent with the San Rafael General
Plan Parks and Recreation goals and policies in that the proposed site is not
part of any proposed open space or parkland area. Parkland fees have been
required to ensure adequate park and recreational facilities are available for
the residents of the subdivision.
4. The proposed subdivision is located on the south-western
portion of the hill and the building envelopes have been sited, to the extent
feasible, to take advantage of future passive or natural heating opportunities.
Large trees have been preserved on site to aid in passive natural cooling.
5. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of
development proposed.
Negative Declaration
6. The project will not have a significant adverse impact on the
environment and a Negative Declaration has been adopted by the Planning
Commission. An initial study was prepared for the project and it was
determined that modifications have been made to the project which reduce
potential impacts to a level of insignificance. Public notice of the intent to
adopt the Negative Declaration has been done pursuant to state law. The
Planning Commission and City Council have considered the proposed
Negative Declaration in conjunction with any public comments received
during the review period.
7. A Mitigation Monitoring program has been adopted to insure
implementation of all conditions required to mitigate any impacts to the
point of no significance.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the City Council denies the appeal and
upholds the Planning Commission's adoption of a Negative Declaration and
Conditional Approval and hereby adopts the Negative Declaration and
approves Tentative Map TS89-29 subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit
"A", attached hereto.
I, JEANNE M. LEONCM, 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 Twentieth day
of May, 1991, by the following vote, to wit:
V
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Boro, Shippey, Thayer & Vice -Mayor
Breiner
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS: None
COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Mulryan
10
JE - M. LEONCIrTI, City Clerk
Revised Conditions of Approval May 6, 1991 Exhibit "A"
Fire Department
(1) Based on the limited access, an automatic residential fire sprinkler
system shall be installed throughout conforming to NFPA Std. 13D as
modified by the Fire Marshal.
(2) Addresses shall be posted conforming to Fire Prevention Std. 205.
(3) The nearest fire hydrant shall be upgraded to a Jones 3740 model. If it
has already been upgraded due to other projects in the area within the
past two years, this applicant shall participate in the cost of that
upgrade.
(4) A permit application shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau
with two sets of plans for review prior to installation on all automatic
and fixed fire extinguishing and detection systems. Specification sheets
for each type of device shall also be submitted for review.
(5) A fire retardant roof covering is required with a minimum Class "C"
listing on all new roofs.
(6) UL/SFM smoke detectors and openable bedroom windows shall be
installed conforming to the Uniform Building Code.
(7) All meetings with or inspections by the Fire Department require a
minimum 24-hour advanced appointment.
(8) An approved turn -around shall be constructed on lot 4 to facilitate
emergency turn around access. The plan for this turn around area
shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approval before
application for a building permit on Lot 4.
Police Department
(9) An audible intrusion alarm shall be installed in the building.
(10) Post signs and paint driveways/curbs/parking areas red which have
emergency access lanes.
(11) The street numbers shall be displayed in a prominent location on the
street side of the property in such a position that the number is easily
visible to approaching emergency vehicles. The numbers shall be no
less than 6 inches in height and shall be of a contrasting color to the
background to which they are attached. The address numbers shall be
illuminated during darkness.
(12) Exposed roof vents and ducts shall be grated or constructed of an
impact resistant material to the satisfaction of the Police Department.
Skylights shall be secured and hatch openings shall be burglary
resistant. Glazing shall be of a burglary resistant glass or glass -like
material.
(13) Perimeter walls, fences, trash storage area, etc., shall be built to prevent
access to the roof or balconies.
(14) All exterior lighting shall be sufficient to establish a sense of well-being
to the pedestrian and one that is sufficient to facilitate recognition of
persons at a reasonable distance. Type and placement of lighting shall
be to the satisfaction of the Police Department.
(15) All exterior man doors shall be of solid core construction with a
minimum thickness of one and three fourths inches (1-3/4") or with
panels not less than nine sixteenth inches (9/16") thick. Side garage
doors and doors leading from the garages areas to private residences or
multiple dwelling residences are included in this requirement.
(16) Metal framed glass doors shall be set in metal door jambs.
(17) Metal framed glass doors shall have a dead bolt lock with a cylinder
guard and hardened steel throw that is a minimum of 1 inch long.
(18) Exterior jambs for doors shall be so constructed or protected so as to
prevent violation of the function of the strike plate from the outside.
The strike plate shall be secured to the jamb by a minimum of two
screws which must penetrate at least 2 inches into the solid backing
beyond the jamb.
(19) Exterior doors that swing outward shall have non -removal hinge pins.
(20) In -swinging exterior doors shall have rabbited jambs.
(21) Glass on exterior doors or within 40 inches of an exterior door shall be
break resistant glass or glass -like material to the satisfaction of the
Police Department.
(22) All windows within 12 feet of the ground level shall have a secondary
lock mounted to the frame of the window. The secondary lock shall be
a bolt lock and shall be no less than 1/8 inch in thickness. The lock
shall have a hardened steel throw of 1/2 inch minimum length.
Pa
(23) Louvered windows shall not be installed within 8 feet of the ground
level.
(24) Any window in or within 40 inches of an exterior door shall be
stationary and non -removable.
(25) Landscaping shall not block or obstruct the view of any door, window,
or lighting fixture.
(26) Any alternate materials or methods of construction shall be reviewed
with the Crime Prevention Officer before installation.
(27) The Crime Prevention Officer shall be allowed to inspect and approve
the construction prior to occupancy.
Public Works
A. Plans and Permits
(28) An engineered Improvement Plan shall be submitted for review and
approval prior to recordation of the subdivision map. The Engineered
Plan shall show all public and private improvements.
(29) Prior to acceptance of the improvements Mylar "As Builts" for all site
improvements shall be filed with the Department of Public Works.
(30) An easement shall be created for drainage purposes where drainage
from one lot is directed across adjacent property within the
subdivision.
B. Agreements and Securities
(31) A standard subdivision agreement shall be executed by the applicant
for the construction of all public and common area site improvements.
(32) An engineer's estimate shall be submitted for the cost of the proposed
improvements. The estimate shall be subject to the approval of the
City Engineer.
(33) Based on the engineer's estimate, bonding or other security, shall be
supplied to insure the completion of improvements.
(34) Plan check and inspection fees based on the engineer's estimate shall be
paid prior to recordation of the subdivision map.
3
C. Grading and Earthwork
(35) Improvement plans shall be reviewed by the project soils engineer for
conformance with the project soils report.
(36) All earthwork shall be performed under the supervision of the project
soils engineer; and a final report shall be submitted prior to acceptance
of the work.
(37) Any cut and fill slopes shall be contour graded and rounded to provide
a natural looking shape.
(38) All existing fallen trees and timber shall be removed from the site.
(39) Grading plans shall show all proposed and existing contours as well as
proposed drainage improvements.
D. Erosion
(40) An erosion control plan shall be submitted for approval of the City
Engineer.
(41) Erosion control plans shall show methods of controlling erosion
during construction and after final grading.
(42) Downstream drainage facilities shall be cleaned of all silt emanating
from the project.
E. Storm Drainage
(43) The improvement plans shall show all existing and proposed drainage
facilities.
(44) The proposed drainage system is approved in concept only. The final
concept shall be approved by the City Engineer.
(45) All drainage from improved areas (roofs, driveways, and paved walks)
shall be collected and piped directly to the proposed drainage system.
(46) Each individual lot shall be constructed to properly drain to the street
or to an established drainage facility.
(47) Offsite drainage improvements will be required on Newhall Drive.
Alternately, because Newhall Drive is a private street, if the approval
required for installation of a drainage system in Newhall Drive cannot
be obtained, a drainage system shall be installed in Linden Lane.
►.1
F. Sanitary Sewer
(48) The improvement plans shall show the location of all existing and
proposed sanitary sewer facilities.
(49) Sanitary sewer plans shall be reviewed and signed by the San Rafael
Sanitation District.
(50) The public sanitary sewer in Linden Lane shall be extended to the mid
point of the frontage of Lot 1.
(51) All gravity sanitary sewers shall be air and mandrel tested prior to
acceptance of the work.
(52) All District maintained sewer lines shall be constructed within the
street right-of-way.
(53) No horizontal curves are allowed in the public sanitary sewer.
(54) Manholes shall be installed at all angle points in the sanitary sewer
alignment. The line may terminate in a rodhole.
G. Streets and Frontage Improvements
(55) The improvement plans shall show all proposed and existing frontage
improvements.
(56) An encroachment permit will be required for the construction of all
frontage improvements.
(57) Driveway connections to the street shall be designed to provide site
distance to the satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer.
(58) Newhall Drive shall be paved to the satisfaction of the abutting
property owners. This shall be agreed to in writing prior to
commencement of any work. If no drainage improvements are
installed in Newhall Drive, paving of Newhall Drive shall not be
required.
(59) Prior to occupancy of the first house built on Linden Lane, the roadway
shall be widened consistent with the recommendations in the traffic
report prepared by Allco Engineering dated October 9,1990.
H. Utilities
(60) All utility services shall be underground. If any trenching is done on
the roadways, the utilities on Linden Lane and Newhall Drive shall be
undergrounded also.
(61) The project improvement plans shall show all proposed and existing
utilities.
Planning Department
(62) This Tentative Map shall approve a four lot subdivision as shown on
Exhibits "A" through "F" attached to the January 15, 1991 staff report
and revised January 11, 1991 and submitted for the Planning
Commission meeting of January 15, 1991, including any changes to
these plans noted in the Conditions of Approval.
(63) 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 the 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 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.
(64) 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 project
conditions and the approved landscape plans. Future 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 or
other dangerous conditions, and such tree removal has been approved
by the Zoning Administrator.
(65) A restriction allowing no further subdivision of Lot 4 shall appear on
the Final Map before recordation of the Final Map.
(66) All Design Review applications for individual lots shall include an
updated 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
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, as reviewed and approved by the DRB, shall become
r�
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. The arborist's report shall
also identify which trees are to be stub -cut and which trees are to be
replaced by more desirable species.
(67) All homes to be constructed shall be subject to Design Review by the
Design Review Board and Planning Commission. The Linden Lane
Neighborhood Association shall be noticed and consulted regarding
any DRB meetings on any proposed dwellings for this site. Design
Parameters shall include:
1. Conformance with the scale of homes in the surrounding area;
the footprint or building coverage on lots 2, 3 and 4 shall not
exceed 2,500 square feet, and the building coverage on lot 1 shall
not exceed 2,200 square feet; exceptions may be made for one story
houses with Design Review Board approval;
2. The living area shall not exceed 3,500 square feet on lots 2, 3 and
4, and 3,100 square feet on lot 1. Homes shall be a maximum of
two and one-half stories. Maximums are not guaranteed and all
homes must be designed to fit the individual lot conditions;
3. A minimum amount of tree removal. For each tree removed
or relocated, the proposed landscaping plan shall include at least
three 15 gallon replacement trees of an appropriate species unless
exceptions or modifications are approved by the DRB. If the tree
removed or relocated is an oak or cypress tree, the replacement
species shall be the same as removed;
4. Home designs shall conform to the natural terrain and relate to
site topography in order to minimize grading. The designs must
conform to the City's Hillside Standards currently under
preparation;
5. The style of the dwellings shall be varied in massing, roof type
and exterior materials to provide an individualistic character for
each house yet provide a compatibility with the existing
neighborhood, gables and roof overhangs are encouraged;
6. Two and three car garages shall be provided depending on the
site size and topography;
7. Pool sites and/or garden areas shall be provided only at the rear
of each lot;
8. A maximum height of 30' as determined by the Hillside
Residential Design Guidelines;
9. Brown/green or other recessive exterior colors to blend with
surroundings;
7
10. The exterior materials shall be primarily wood siding (boards
or shingles) with wood windows and trim. The roofs shall be a
dark fire resistive material such as concrete tile or architectural
grade composition shingles;
11. Retaining walls shall be designed and constructed in an
attractive manner which blends 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.
12. Applications for Design Review for each house shall include:
(a) A photographic study accurately demonstrating the visual
impact of the proposed architecture from viewing points
determined by the Planning Director; (b) A slope analysis and
slope map; (c) A grading plan and precise architectural drawings;
(d) A plan that shows how each house relates to the neighboring
dwellings and the effect that the house has on the neighboring
backyards; (e) Story Poles for review by Design Review Board
members at least one week before the meeting; (f) A model of the
proposed home.
13. A building stepback shall be required on the downhill
elevations and all walls facing the front property line. This
stepback shall be designed in conformance with the San Rafael
Hillside Residential Design Guidelines.
(68) Any proposed houses for the site will be reviewed by the Cultural
Affairs Commission to ensure compatability with the historic mansion
on the hill and the historic homes in the neighborhood.
(69) All landscape plans shall be prepared by a landscape architect
specializing in revegetation, and shall include as much of the native
vegetation as possible to retain the woodland atmosphere. All new
landscaping shall consist mostly of deer resistant and drought tolerant
species native to the area. Landscape plans shall include appropriate
plantings of cut banks or other areas which may be subject to erosion.
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 plans.
(70) All trees to be removed during the installation of individual homes
shall be marked in the field. The Planning Department shall be
provided a 10 -working day lead time to inspect and approve proposed
tree removal. At the time of this inspection, all areas of proposed
grading shall be clearly marked. Any trees removed shall be replaced
F;
with appropriate species as described in condition 67 (3) above, and
shown on the individual landscape plan for each parcel.
(71) 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.
(72) The rock wall along Newhall Drive shall be retained whereever
possible to retain the present rural atmosphere of the street.
(73) The building envelope for lot 1 shall be located at least 45 feet from the
property line along Linden Lane; the building envelope for lot 2 shall
be located 50 feet from the property line along Linden Lane; the
building envelope for lot 3 shall be as presented for approval in the
January 15, 1991 Planning Commission staff report; the building
envelope setback for lot 4 shall retain a minimum of 25 feet from the
edge of the existing pavement area on Newhall Drive.
(74) All development shall at a minimum meet the requirements of the
1982 Uniform Fire code.
(75) The developer shall be required to bond for eradication of all scotch
and french broom on the project site. The amount to this bonding
shall be as determined by the Planning Director and the Public Works
Director, 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 efforts shall shall be
completed to the satisfaction of the Planning and Public Works
Directors prior to issuance of the first building permit within the
subdivision. Annual eradication of broom from all unsold lots shall be
the responsibility of the developer and shall occur during the months
of September and 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.
(76) Hours of construction shall be limited from 7:00 a.m. until 6:00 p.m.,
Monday through Friday only.
(77) 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
6
(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)
(78) 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.
(79) A Parkland Dedication fee of $1809.53 shall be paid for each unit prior
to recordation of final map. This fee is based upon City Ordinance
#1558, and is stated in 1989 dollars and will be adjusted at time of
recordation of final map.
(80) This subdivision is approved for two years from May 6, 1991, unless
renewed. Prior to expiration, the applicant may apply for an additional
one year time extension.
10