HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Resolution 7771 (General Plan 2000)RESOLUTION NO. 7771
RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL
ADOPTING THE SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2000
WHEREAS, in the fall of 1985 the City Council of the City of San Rafael
initiated preparation of a revised comprehensive, long-term general plan for the
physical development of the city and planning area pursuant to California Government
Code Section 65300 et. seq.; and,
WHEREAS, full public involvement in the preparation of the Draft General
Plan has been ensured through duly noticed public workshops, public hearings and
other means,
including the following:
1.
Development of a general plan mailing list with almost 3,000
groups, agencies and individuals who received newsletters
and notices of all workshops, public hearings and the
availability of documents;
2.
Notification to over 20,000 property owners in the San Rafael
Planning Area (notices sent out at 3 separate times; Spring, 1986;
Fall, 1986; and January, 1988; preparation of a newsletter summary of
the Draft General Plan which was also sent to all property owners and
made available at meetings in May, 1988);
3.
Community opinion survey of 600 residents and 100
businesses (April, 1986);
4.
City Council consideration of over 500 verbal comments and over 330
pieces of written correspondence; and,
WHEREAS, the San Rafael City Council reviewed and considered the
following documents relevant to the preparation of the Draft San Rafael General Plan
2000:
1.
Community Workshop Report and Community Survey Report
(May, 1986)
2.
Economic Conditions and Issues (June, 1986)
3.
Preliminary Background Reports on Natural Environment,
Health and Safety and Community Development (May and July,
1986)
4.
Draft San Rafael General Plan 2000 (October, 1986);
5.
Draft Environmental Impact Report (October, 1986);
6.
Staff and consultant analysis contained in over 60 memos,
staff reports and other documents providing additional
information or responding to specific public comments or
requests for additional information;
7.
Revisions to the Draft San Rafael General Plan 2000 (June, 1987);
8.
Draft EIR Addendum (July, 1987);
9.
Response to Comments on the Draft EIR (July, 1987);
10.
Revised Draft San Rafael General Plan (January, 1988);
11.
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report (January, 1988);
ORIGINAL -7 11/
12. Responses to Written Comments on the Revised draft EIR (May, 1988);
13. Final EIR (July, 1988); and,
WHEREAS, the San Rafael Planning Commission is required by state law to
hold at least one public hearing and make a written recommendation to the legislative
body on the adoption of the Draft San Rafael General Plan 2000; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held 20 duly noticed public
workshops, 8 duly noticed public hearings and 10 duly noticed decision-making
meetings on the Draft San Rafael General Plan 2000, including:
1. Three community workshops before the Draft San Rafael
General Plan was prepared (April, 1986)
2. Two public workshops including both the City Council and
Planning Commission to receive public comment and review
Preliminary Background Reports for Natural Environment,
Health and Safety and Community Development (May and July,
1986);
3. Three public workshops and two public hearings on the Draft
General Plan (October and November, 1986);
4. 15 workshops to review the Draft San Rafael General Plan
2000 (December, 1986 through April, 1987); and
5. Six public hearings and 10 decision-making meetings on the
revised Draft San Rafael General Plan 2000 (July through
October, 1987); and,
WHEREAS, the San Rafael Planning Commission forwarded its written
recommendations to the City Council in the form of a Revised Draft San Rafael General
Plan 2000 (January, 1988) and directed that the Planning Department staff prepare a
revised Draft Environmental Impact Report incorporating analysis of Planning
Commission recommended changes to the Draft San Rafael General Plan 2000 and,
thereafter, cause said revised Draft EIR to be re -circulated for the period required by
law and forwarded to the City Council for its review and consideration for certification;
and,
WHEREAS, the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report (January, 1988)
was prepared by Planning Department staff pursuant to Planning Commission
direction, re -circulated for the period required by law and forwarded to the City Council
for its review and consideration for certification; and,
WHEREAS, the San Rafael City Council is required by state law to hold at
least one public hearing before certifying the Final EIR and adopting a revision to the
general plan ; and,
WHEREAS, the San Rafael City Council held one duly noticed public hearing
on the Revised Draft EIR, four duly noticed public hearings on the Revised Draft San
Rafael General Plan 2000, and seven duly noticed public meetings on the Revised
Draft San Rafael General Plan 2000 and Revised Draft EIR, including:
2
1. One public meeting to introduce the Revised Draft General Plan
(February, 1988);
2. One public hearing on the Revised Draft EIR (March, 1988);
3. Four public hearings on the Revised Draft General Plan (March, April
and May, 1988);
4. One community workshop (March, 1988);
5. One public meeting for the City Council to review the adequacy of the
Responses to Comments on the Revised Draft EIR (June, 1988);
6. Three public meetings for the City Council to review the Revised Draft
General Plan (June, 1988);
7. One public meeting to certify the Final EIR and adopt the Revised Draft
General Plan (July, 1988); and,
WHEREAS, the San Rafael City Council has considered all of the written
correspondence, verbal testimony, staff reports, and background reports prepared, and
the information contained in the Final Environmental Impact Report on the Revised
Draft San Rafael General Plan 2000.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of San
Rafael does hereby adopt the revised San Rafael General Plan 2000 (January, 1988)
and City Council revisions to the Plan, included as Attachment A to this resolution, and
summarized as follows:
General Plan Organization:
The General Plan complies with the mandatory requirements of the California
Government Code (Section 65300 et seq) and covers the topics of land use,
circulation, housing, open space, conservation, recreation, safety and noise.
The land area covered by the Plan is located in the developed city center
corridor of Marin County, and includes the incorporated City of San Rafael,
and unincorporated areas under Marin County jurisdiction within the City of
San Rafael Planning Area and Sphere of Influence.
Major Policy Features of the Revised General Plan:
1. Overall City Character. The General Plan intends to retain the
"small town" character of San Rafael by maintaining the historic design
qualities and pedestrian scale and orientation of downtown
development and by retaining the existing suburban scale of
development elsewhere in San Rafael. The Land Use Plan reinforces
the community image of basically lower density neighborhoods
surrounding vital activity areas where shopping, services and
employment opportunities are available.
2. Protection of the Natural Environment. Protection of the Natural
Environment is a major focus of the General Plan. Lands of open space
value, designated on the Open Space Plan Map, are encouraged to be
3
preserved by public acquisition, specific development review, or other
means. Priorities for public acquisition are outlined in the Plan. An
Open Space Management Committee will improve management of
these lands. Policies in the Plan provide protection of wetlands, rare
and endangered species habitat and other vital natural resources.
3. Concern for Public Health and Safety. The Plan identifies
various health and safety hazards which must be considered in
planning the location, design, intensity and type of land uses in a given
area. Policies address geologic and seismic risk, flooding, hazardous
materials, disaster preparedness, fire, crime prevention and noise.
4. Jobs/Housing Relationship. The Plan seeks to retain the City's
diversity and provide varied housing opportunities for area workers.
The General Plan emphasizes residential land uses on sites which
could be suitable for residential or commercial/industrial uses and
encourages mixed use development in the Downtown area.
4. Transportation Needs. The Plan establishes level of service
standards for traffic operations. New development which would
decrease traffic levels of service is timed so that needed transportation
improvements are under construction prior to construction of such
projects. New development must also pay traffic mitigation fees for
needed improvements. Development intensity is limited in the Plan by
local circulation capacity. Some transportation solutions are regional.
San Rafael is a centrally located community affected by development
trends in several counties. The Plan identifies regional transportation
needs and endorses regional funding and cooperation to achieve
identified regional improvements. Proposed regional improvements
include a transitway on the Northwest Pacific railroad right of way, high
occupancy vehicle lanes on Highway 101 and parallel arterial roads.
5. Projections. The Plan contains development projections for both jobs
and housing. These jobs and housing projections to 1992 and 2000
are based on anticipated market factors, property owner desires, and
circulation system or other infrastructure constraints. The numbers
provide a basis for major long range infrastructure project planning in
the San Rafael Planning Area.
6. Economic and Fiscal Goals. Historically, the economic and fiscal
health of the City has not been dependent to a significant degree on a
major policy effort on the part of the City. However, with the passage of
Proposition 13 and added retail development in other areas of the
county, it has become more important for the City to take a more
proactive role. In addition, the age and condition of the City's
infrastructure (streets, flood protection, sewers) will create significant
maintenance and capital costs for the City in coming years. All these
n
conditions will make it critical for the City to have an economic plan for
the future. Some of the aspects of the plan include:
a. Downtown regional sales and service emphasis.
b. Support for Northgate Regional Shopping Center.
C. Development of an auto center.
d. Protection and encouragement of high sales tax
generating uses.
7. More Detailed Land Use Designations for Downtown. The
Plan proposes more detailed land uses, including mixed use
designations for the downtown area to provide ways for people to live,
work and shop in downtown.
8. More Detailed Industrial, Commercial, Office and Mixed Use
Designations. The Plan provides more direction and specificity
regarding the use and intensity of commercial and industrial
development. The Land Use Plan provides several commercial, office,
industrial and mixed use designations to identify different types of uses
(e.g. neighborhood serving as compared to general retail).
9. Designation of Public Facilities Sites. The General Plan sets
forth City policy on the location of public facilities. This includes new
sites, as well as abandonment of existing sites.
10. Housing Policies and Programs. The Plan generally continues to
promote housing policies and programs established in the City's 1985
Housing Element. Key aspects of the Plan are housing policies and
programs that encourage low and moderate income housing. In
addition, the Plan identifies affordable Housing Opportunity Areas.
11. Residential Density Standards. The Land Use Plan identifies five
residential density ranges based on land capability, existing
development patterns and circulation capacity.
12. Use of Residential Density Range: In any residential density
designation, maximum densities are not guaranteed. Density of
residential development on any site must respond to specific site
resources and constraints, potentially hazardous conditions, traffic and
access, adequacy of infrastructure, City Design policies and
development patterns and prevailing densities of adjacent developed
areas.
13. Comprehensive Approach to Urban Design. The Plan provides
overview policies concerning urban design, and recommends that
specific urban design guidelines be developed for specific areas. The
design emphasis enhances opportunities that exist, such as San
5
Rafael's bayfront location, and helps establish an overall design
approach for specific areas to improve the long-term economic viability
of individual projects.
14. Canal and Bayfront Enhancement. The Plan encourages
enhancement of the San Rafael Canal and citywide Bayfront Areas
through water -oriented project design, increased access and use of the
canal and bayfront, and protection of marine -dependent uses along the
Canal. The Plan further promotes maintenance of the Canal as a
navigable waterway.
15. San Rafael's Planning Area and Sphere of Influence (SOI).
The General Plan designates the Planning Area as having a direct
physical and social influence on San Rafael's planning but not being
subject to annexation. The San Rafael Sphere of Influence is the
probable ultimate boundary and service area for the City. It coincides
with the City's Planning Area boundary. Annexation policies distinguish
where logical, near-term, orderly expansion of urban development can
occur and not adversely impact City services.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Final Environmental Impact Report on
the San Rafael General Plan 2000 identifies environmental impacts of the Plan,
mitigation measures and alternatives. Upon review and consideration of the EIR and
other documents prepared as part of the General Plan work, the San Rafael City
Council makes the following findings in accordance with Section 15091 of the CEQA
Guidelines:
1. Mitigation measures in the Final EIR are included in the
General Plan. A summary of General Plan Impacts and Mitigation
Measures is included as Attachment B. Mitigation measures identified
in the Final EIR which reduce most of the identified significant impacts to
insignificant levels are also included in the General Plan.
The only mitigation measure included in the Final EIR that is not
included in the General Plan is consideration of a comprehensive
approach to phasing development along the Highway 101 corridor and
consideration of jobs and housing growth phasing along the corridor
(page 86 of the Final EIR). To be successful, this mitigation measure
would have to be implemented corridor -wide since its effect would be
corridor -wide.
2. The ability of the City to mitigate certain impacts is shared
with other agencies. The following agencies share responsibility for
infrastructure and land use planning: (a) Highway 101 traffic (State of
California, County of Marin, other jurisidictions participating in the
Highway 101 Corridor Study); (b) Water (Marin Municipal Water
District); (c) Sewer (Las Gallinas Valley Sanitary District, Central Marin
0
Sanitation Agency, San Rafael Sanitation District); and (d) Land Use
Planning within the unincorporated portions of the San Rafael Planning
Area (County of Marin).
3. Specific Economic, Social, or Other Considerations make
Infeasible the Alternatives Identified in the Final EIR. The
following alternatives were -considered and rejected in favor of the
General Plan for the following reasons:
a. Minimal Growth, Maximum Environmental Protection.
-Severe restrictions placed on development of hillsides and Bay
mud, coupled with development prohibition on diked historic
Baylands would have significant impacts on San Rafael land use
patterns. This alternative may result in no reasonable economic
use of some properties.
-Traffic on Highway 101 would continue to increase due to
external development. Transit costs would increase. Traffic
congestion would be the same as or worse than now, as no major
road improvements are proposed in this alternative due to lack of
funding. Improvements listed in the Circulation Background of the
General Plan for which traffic mitigation fees are imposed on
developers would not occur.
-Other road improvements listed in the Circulation Background,
paid for in part by traffic mitigation fees and in part by other
regional sources, might not occur. (It should be noted that many
regional funding sources, including those for circulation
improvements, are based on population size. The Marin County
share of these funds is limited by its low population base.)
-This alternative would reduce the number of new housing units
available and result in significantly fewer low and moderate
income housing units. Construction of fewer housing units would
increase demand for available housing and result in higher cost
housing. The social diversity in the community would be expected
to diminish over time. This alternative would also decrease the
number of new jobs.
b. Low Growth, Limited by Maintaining Traffic Conditions
at Level of Service C.
-The restrictions placed on development affecting critical
interesections would have a significant impact on land use
patterns in the San Rafael Planning area. The reduced
development potential on residential sites could be expected to
7
produce fewer housing units and higher cost housing, leading to
limited housing opportunities for area workers.
-The stated goal for Downtown of attracting new regional retail and
service businesses would be jeopardized by the extremely low
commercial intensities allowed in this alternative. Auto -dependent
environments tend to encourage dispersal of economic activities
and housing.
-Peak hour traffic on local streets should be quite smooth.
However, highway diversions could lead to use of local streets by
drivers seeking to avoid the congested freeway. These diversions
could lead to unanticipated reduction in the Level of Service
despite little or no nearby development.
-Public transit under this alternative would be limited, as there
would be very little incentive to get drivers out of their cars and into
a bus. The transitway would probably not be able to generate the
loads necessary to justify its being built, unless it received funding
and use from riders north of Marin.
C. Growth Controlled by Acceptance of Level of Service E
at Interchanges, Streets and Arterials.
-Land use intensities and densities under this alternative would be
increased. More development could occur before road
improvements are implemented.
-The LOS E alternative would have its biggest impact on the ease
of circulation within the planning area. Business people have
stated that additional congestion would adversely affect their
business and residents have consistently recommended higher
standards. If the City adopted a Level of Service E standard, it
may be quite difficult to raise that standard at some later date.
d. No Project, Maximum Growth, Continuation of Existing
Trends.
-This alternative would result in denser development in some
areas of the City than any of the other alternatives or the Plan and
greater environmental impacts.
-The most significant land use changes would be in North San
Rafael (St. Vincent's/Silveira) because the North San Rafael
Policy Plan would permit intense mixed use. Downtown could
also develop much more intensively, with many tall buildings and
little direction as to type of development that would occur.
-The skewing of development towards more jobs would add more
traffic, particularly in North San Rafael (St. Vincents/Silveira), than
would development of the same area in housing.
(Office/commercial generates 2-3 times as much traffic as
low/medium density residential and 30% more than high density
residential.) This would bring increased numbers of people
commuting into San Rafael, most likely from the north.
-This alternative, because it follows market trends, favors
commercial development over housing. It is anticipated that this
alternative would produce a slightly lower population and a
considerably higher number of jobs.
-Housing demand and cost, would continue to be quite high, given
limited housing opportunities and expanded area jobs. It is
expected that fewer affordable housing units would be built.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that upon review and consideration of the EIR
and other documents prepared as part of the General Plan revision process, the San
Rafael City Council makes the following finding in accordance with Section 15092 of
the CEQA Guidelines:
Reduction in the Number of Housing Units. The General Plan
includes a reduction in the number of housing units from the Planning
Commission -recommended Draft General Plan (January, 1988) for the
following reasons:
a. Lands of St. Vincent's/Silveira: A reduction in the number of
units was made to respond to site environmental constraints,
particularly wetlands, and lack of information concerning use of
the Railroad right-of-way for future transit use.
b. East San Rafael: A reduction in the number of units was made
to respond to environmental constraints and foster creation of
more varied housing types in the neighborhood, with more lower
density housing to complement existing higher density housing.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Final Environmental Impact Report on the
San Rafael General Plan 2000 identifies nine unavoidable significant adverse impacts
of the Draft General Plan, as follows:
Increased Traffic.
Impacts:
-Intersections where level of traffic operation will drop most significantly
are those in or serving currently underdeveloped areas, and certain
Downtown intersections. They are: (a) Miller Creek Road at 101, which
is predicted to go from LOS A to D; (b) intersection of Redwood Highway
and Smith Ranch Road (B to D); (c) intersection of Civic Center Drive
and North San Pedro Road (A to D); (d) Merrydale on-ramp to 101 (B to
D); and (e) intersection of Second and Hetherton (B/C to D).
-Other intersections adversely impacted by increasing traffic and those
intersections having improved traffic operating conditions are identified
in the General Plan and Final EIR maps showing existing and future
traffic conditions (map Vs: GP -14a, 14b and 14c; GP -15a, 15b and
15c).
-Increase in traffic along the 101 corridor.
Mitigation Included in the Plan:
-The Plan lists improvements to Highway 101, a proposed transitway, as
well as 27 specific improvements and signalization to other roadways in
the Planning Area.
-Road improvements listed in the Circulation Background section of the
Plan, paid for in part by traffic mitigation fees and in part by other
regional sources, might not occur (many regional funding sources,
including those for circulation improvements, are based on population
size; the Marin County share of these funds is limited by its low
population base).
-The Plan designates land uses and intensities designed to insure that
a minimum mid-level of service D standard is maintained for PM peak
hour travel. One of the most effective measures to meet these standards
is the adoption of timing mechanisms (both policies and programs) by
which project approvals are tied to needed transportation
improvements. The approach in the Plan is to look at land use and
circulation together so that traffic capacity establishes a maximum limit
on development while still meeting other community goals.
2. Loss of Natural Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat.
Impacts:
-Vegetation and wildlife habitat areas will be replaced by other land
uses as development occurs.
Mitigation Included in the Plan:
-Policies to protect the natural environment assure that as additional
10
development occurs it recognizes and preserves important
environmental resources, such as ridgelines, wetlands, creeks,
shorelines, threatened and endangered species habitat and
archaeological sites.
-Over 25% of the land in the Planning Area is in open space.
3. Increased Population Potentially Exposed to Geotechnical
Hazards.
Impacts:
-Additional development potentially increases population exposed to
geotechnical hazards.
Mitigation Measures Included in the Plan:
-The Plan sets forth more than a dozen policies for the mitigation of
geotechnical hazards. One of the strongest measures is the
geotechnical review requirement. The Geotechnical Review Matrix
defines in some detail the level and timing of geotechnical review
necessary as part of a development project.
-By assuring adequate review of new projects, providing programs to
reduce safety hazards for existing development and programs for
appropriate emergency response plans if disasters occur, the Plan
minimizes potential danger to the health, safety and welfare of the
community.
-The Plan recognizes that hazards are an unavoidable aspect of life and
that not every degree of risk or all hazards can be eliminated.
4. Increased Noise from Construction Activities and Increased
Traffic.
Impacts:
-An increase in average noise levels is expected along major
thoroughfares and near other major noise sources, such as the
proposed transitway.
Mitigation Measures Included in the Plan:
-Noise contours have been prepared for noise generated by major
roadways so that land uses adjacent to these roadways may be
designed to reduce noise impacts. A 3 dB change in sound pressure is
considered a "just detectable" difference in most situations. In no case
11
is there more than a 3dB increase in future noise levels on existing
streets.
-Noise policies establish noise standards for new land uses, and
recommend performance and construction standards as potential
solutions to existing problems.
5. Increased Water Run-off.
Impacts:
-Development resulting from the Plan will cause an increase in
impervious surfaces and consequential increased water runoff.
Mitigation Measures Included in the Plan:
-Existing flood hazards will be reduced through preparation and
implementation of the Drainage System Master Plan (Implementing
Program S -b of the Safety Goals and Policies). Further, current practice
requires that new development subject to planning review is not
permitted unless adequate downstream drainage capacity exists to
accommodate increased peak flows.
6. Adverse Effects on Surface Water Quality from Increased
Run-off.
Impacts:
-Additional development will adversely affect surface water quality
because surface runoff contains urban pollutants and silt.
Mitigation Measures Included in the Plan:
-Normal construction practices currently require that erosion control
measures be incorporated into new developments. These practices
help mitigate the loads of debris and silt entering the Bay. Formalized
erosion control practices will be defined in the City's subdivision and
grading ordinances.
-The City currently evaluates all proposed projects for potential water
quality impacts during project review and requires mitigation measures,
such as sediment and grease traps, where necessary.
-The Plan proposes policy to minimize contaminants entering the San
Rafael Canal and other bodies of water, including San Pablo Bay,
consistent with all pertinent State Health and Water Quality regulations.
12
7. Increased Air Pollution.
Impacts:
-Eight-hour air quality standards may be exceeded under worst case
meteorological conditions at full development potential at two
intersections.
Mitigation Measures Included in the Plan:
-increased efficiency of pollution controls on autos, combined with
mandatory inspection, is expected to help control air pollution.
-A list of mitigation measures in the Final EIR and Plan include a
commitment to a TSM program, land use patterns to reduce reliance on
the automobile and other measures to increase transit use.
8. Conversion of Agricultural Land to Urban Uses.
Impacts:
-Portions of agricultural land of local importance are proposed for urban
uses.
Mitigation Measures Included in the Plan:
-Although agricultural land on parts of St. Vincent's/Silveira could be
converted to urban use within the plan's time frame, this conversion will
not happen immediately, as the Plan's timing mechanisms do not
anticipate development of these areas in the near future.
-The Plan proposes that the Silveira/St. Vincent's lands east of the NWP
railroad tracks remain in agricultural or possible low intensity recreation
uses during the Plan's time frame.
9. Consumption of Non -Renewable Energy Resources.
Impacts:
-Non-renewable energy resources would be consumed with new
development.
Mitigation Measures Included in the Plan:
-Compliance with State energy conservation standards (California
Administrative Code, Title 24), including siting of buildings, insulation
and smaller glazed surfaces is already assuring more energy-efficient
13
buildings than before these requirements were in place. Although
energy usage will increase, the efficiency of use should also increase.
•Plan policies also promote increased use of transit, bicycle and
pedestrian circulations and other means to reduce reliance on the
single -occupant automobile.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that upon review and consideration of the Final
EIR and other documents prepared as part of the General Plan revision process, the
San Rafael City Council makes the following findings of overriding consideration in
regard to the unavoidable significant adverse impacts identified above and contained
in the Final EIR pursuant to Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines:
1. The General Plan is consistent with the intent of ABAG's
Regional Plan and the Marin Countywide Plan which
designate the "Eastern Urban Corridor" of Marin County for
more urban, densely populated development.
•The San Rafael Area lies within the "Eastern Urban Corridor " defined
in the Marin Countywide Plan. The "Eastern Urban Corridor" is
designated to contain more urban, densely populated development
than the "Inland Corridor" and "Coastal Corridor" areas of the County.
This designation is consistent with the Association of Bay Area
Government's Regional Plan, which is committed to a city -centered
concept of development. The city -centered concept was adopted over
ten years ago to promote compact growth for reasons of cost -efficiency
in public services, and to promote community separators to retain open
space resources.
•The San Rafael Planning Area is influenced by its location in the Marin
County/Sonoma County/Highway 101 development corridor. Growth in
jobs and population in the Bay Area, and in San Francisco, Marin
County and Sonoma County in particular, results in development
pressures and housing and service demand on the San Rafael
Planning Area.
•The basic intent of the Marin Countywide Plan is to preserve the natural
environmental character of Marin County by encouraging more
development in existing urban areas and preserving the central and
western parts of the County for agriculture and open space/recreation.
2. The General Plan achieves affordable housing goals while
protecting environmental resources.
•Affordable housing goals and the City's fair share of regional housing
need can be achieved under the policies and programs in the General
Plan. The Plan must balance affordable housing need with
14
environmental protection and traffic constraints.
-The General Plan includes a number of affordable housing programs
which are dependent on higher project densities. These include density
bonus provisions, provisions for mixed use developments, etc.
Nevertheless, the densities in already developed residential
neighborhoods will remain the same as a result of a major purpose
articulated in the Plan to protect existing developed neighborhoods.
3. The General Plan allows economic growth which supplies
jobs for existing and future residents while protecting
environmental resources and prudently managing traffic
capacity.
-The Plan seeks to provide a balance of land uses to provide jobs and
services while still protecting environmental resources.
4. The General Plan must provide a reasonable economic use
of private property.
-The City could be subject to possible regulatory takings claims if no
reasonable economic use of private property is permitted.
5. The General Plan would maintain social diversity in the
community through providing affordable housing
opportunities.
-Providing affordable housing encourages social diversity in the
community and provides housing for a high proportion of local workers,
many of whom are paid low salaries.
In conclusion, the listed overriding considerations are deemed significantly
important by the San Rafael City Council that a statement of override is
hereby adopted.
I, JEANNE M. LEONCINI, clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that
the foregoing resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular
meeting of the Council of said City on Monday , the 18th day
of July , 1988, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Boro, Breiner, Frugoli, Thayer & Mayor
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None Mulryan
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
JE NNE M. LEONC I, City Clerk
15
G o KESOL U r ION
jr rAck MEIV r A
Compilation of Proposed Revisions
from June 7, 15 and 21, 1900 City Council Review of
the Draft San Rafael General Plan 2000
6o tAe order tAey appear in the Plan)
LAND USE POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
Revise LU -1 by replacing the words "once" with "only after"
Revise LU- 1Ob consistent with revisions to H-20 as follows: "Densities
above the otherwise maximum allowable residential density under the
zoning ordinance and land use element may be granted for projects which
provide a minimum of 15% of total units affordable for 40 or more years
to low and moderate income households (as defined in policy H-20), with
at least 8% for low income households. To achieve a density bonus, units
must be constructed onsite, and only if the main project is age restricted
can density bonus units be age restricted. Further, use of density bonuses
is limited to medium and high density land use designations."
Revise LU -14 to read as follows.
"Intensity of Commercial and Industrial Development. Commercial
and industrial areas have been assigned floor area ratios (FAR's) to
identify appropriate intensities. (The FAR is the total gross building
square footage divided by the land area, exclusive of public streets
Parking areas, covered or uncovered, and non leaseable covered atriums are
not included in calculating FARs) Maximum allowable FAR's are not
guaranteed, particularly in environmentally sensitive areas such as
hillside; Intensity of commercial and industrial development on any site
shall respond to the following factors. site resources and constraints,
traffic and access, potentially hazardous conditions, adequacy of
infrastructure, and City design policies. FAR limits apply only to
non-residential projects.
Designated FAR's for different areas of the City are described below -
a. Hillside Areas: Undeveloped commercial or industrially designated
properties shall be limited to the following development intensities
based on slope:
- Portions with less than 5�C slope. 100%, of FAR as applicable under
July 12, 1988
sections b -g below or policy LU -47
- Portions with slope of 5-15% slope: 50-75% of applicable FAR
under sections b -g below or policy LU -47
- Portions with slope greater than 15%:.01 FAR
Clustering of development is encouraged and may be required to avoid
sensitive areas
Renumber sections a -f to sections b -g."
Add to end of LU -20: 'Where 25% or more of the units are for low income
households, a one story height bonus up to 4 stories may be provided in
appropriate Downtown areas on sites greater than 20,000 square feet in
size where design criteria can be met."
Modify LU -29 as follows- 'Tree Preservation. Large trees should be
preserved, with particular emphasis on significant Eucalyptus, Oak and
Redwood Tree Groves and specimen oak and redwood trees. When new
development occurs, require a..."
Include two new water land use policies following LU-51-
'LU- _ Water Conservation. Promote and encourage water conservation
measures."
"LU- _ Water Supplies. Support Mann Municipal Water District in
developing additional long term, water supplies."
Add a new land use policy following LU -52:
'LU- _ Odor Impacts. Consider odor impacts when evaluating land uses
and development projects near wastewater treatment plants, or treatment
plant expansion projects."
Add to end of LU -54. 'The City may waive FARs for permanent child care
portions of non residential buildings-"
Add to LU -58 "...those private business uses, such as artist, accountant,
consultant, etc. which would qualify as a "Herne Occupation" under the
City's zoning standards."
Pevise LU -n to state. "Develop a tree preservation ordinance which
includes standards for protection of trees Evaluate the costs and
j wv 12, 1988
feasibility of including tree maintenance provisions to insure preservation
of significant "view, light and air corridors". If such provisions can be
included without significant additional costs to the City, include "view,
light and air corridor" provisions in the tree preservation ordinance "
Modify LU -aa to read- "Except where reclaimed water use is possible,
establish landscape design standards which ... non -peak evapotranspiration
times. In all areas, establish standards for residential flstures...
recommendations."
Include three new water land use programs following LU -aa:
"LU- . Water Use. Support MMWD efforts to encourage tower water usage
through such measures as requiring alternate day watering; providing drip
irrigation systems "at cost" to customers; reviewing landscape plans for
water conserving design; and other similar measures."
"LU- . City Landscaping. Review City landscape watering practices to
determine ways to reduce water use."
"LU- . Reclaimed Water. Support Dater District and other agency
efforts to expand reclaimed water use. In areas designated for reclaimed
water use, the City's planning process will encourage development of
greenbelt areas to promote the application of reclaimed water and assure
the proper monitoring of reclaimed water application."
Add a new land use program following LU -cc "LU-, Odor Mitigation.
When property 1s proposed for development within 1000 feet of a
wastewater treatment plant, the City will review the need for appropriate
odor mitigation plans Additionally, at the time any improvements are
proposed to a wastewater treatment plant, the respons,ble agency will be
encouraged to consider purchase of an odor easement or similar measure
to assure mitigation of possible odor nuisances."
Add a neer land use program following LU -j j: "Neighborhood
Meetings. Continue the City's practice of consulting with neighborhood
representatives and nearby property owners as part of the development
review process "
CIRCULATION GOALS, POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
Add to Circulation Introduction, p. 35, end of para. 2. "Emergence
j Wy 1211 199
connectors are discussed in the Safety Element"
Revise C -B "Maintain acceptable local circulation system operating
conditions,with a goal of achieving LOS C operating conditions "
Revise C - la to read "Level of Service D is the Citywide standard for
transportation conditions during peal, hours only at major highway
interchanges and on arterial streets and arterial intersections as listed
below:
Miller Creek/southbound 101 ramps
Miller Creek/northbound 101 ramps
Smith Ranch/Redwood
Freitas/Redwood/Civic Center
Freitas/Del Presidio
North San Pedro/Civic Center
North San Pedro/Merrydale
North San Pedro/Los Ranchitos
Lincoln/Mission
Lincoln/Fifth
Second/Grand
Andersen/Bellam
Irene/Kerner
Andersen/ 101 southbound ramps
Lucas Valley/ 101 southbound ramps
Grand/Thi rd
Lincoln/Second
Bellam/E. Francisco
Bel Iam/ 1-580,1101 northbound ramps
Bel lrim/ 1-580/ 101 southbound ramps
Revise wording in C-2 as follows: "C-2_ Level of Service Mid Point.
The mid point of the Level of Service D range shall be used as a capacity
limit for Level of Service conditions. The City would consider accepting
the bottom of Level of Service D for a definable interim time period for
projects which provide a high percentage of units affordable to lo,,Y and
moderate income households, high tax generating uses, or needed
neighborhood serving uses."
Revise C-3 by replacing the words "once" with "only after"
Add to end of C-7. "For projects which the City grants priority based on
revenue to the City by high tax generating uses, that pnorlty status may
Jury 12, 1988
be conditioned upon the City's commitment to allocate some of the tax
revenue generated to funding of traffic improvements in the area of
limited circulation capacity."
C -b: Add to end Neighborhood committees should be used to determine
"needed neighborhood serving uses".
HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
H -B: Modify goal to read: "Protect and conserve the existing housing
stock."
H-8: Reprise to read: "Maintain the City's existing stock of lower cost
units. Contempo Marin and Downtown area housing units are examples of
this type of housing stock that should be preserved. Conversions may be
permitted only with provision of new units of the same general type,
numbers and price range "
H-19 Revise as follows: "H-19. Below Market Rete Housing in
Market Rate Residential Projects. Residential projects of 10 or more
1 ots/uni is shat l be requi red to provi de at 1 east 10% of thei r uni is
affordable to moderate income households at 80-100% of median income
for at least 40 years. The City's primary intent is the construction of
units on-site. If this is not practical, the City will allow other
alternatives of equal value, such as in -lieu fees, construction of units
off-site, etc "
H-20 Revise as follows. 'H-20. Affordable Housing Projects.
Projects with high percentages of units affordable to low and moderate
income households are desired, high priority projects. Provide
density./traffic allocation bonuses from a limited number of affordable
housing reserve trips as noted in the Appendices, "fast track processing",
and waiver/reduction of fees to projects which provide a minimum of 15%
of total units affordable to low income (50-80% of median) and moderate
income (80-100% of median) households, with at least 8% for low income
households for at least 40 years. To achieve a density bonus, units must be
constructed onsite, and only if the main project is age restricted can
density bonus units be age restricted. Further, use of density bonuses is
limited to medium and high density land use designations. Where 25% or
more of the units are for low income households, a one story height bonus
up to 4 stories may be considered in appropriate Downtown areae: on sites
greater than 20,000 square feet in size where design criteria can be met."
5 Jul}- 12, 1988
H-21: Revise to read: " are retained for 40 years or more as affordable
housing stock."
H-31: Include "single parents"
H-b(b): Change the "San Francisco Foundation" to "Marin Community
Foundation" and add "Redevelopment Bonds and funds"
H -c: Revise to state: "The City will "fast track" and reduce or waive fees
for projects which provide a minimum of 15% BMR housing for 40 years,
with at least 8% for low income households, as defined in H-20. "Fast
tracking"..."
Revise We to read "Require developers to have neighborhood meetings
with residents as part of any major development application process."
H -i Add to end: "Redevelopment Agency funds will be set aside each year
for development of housing affordable to low income households."
H -r First sentence, begin with "Strongly encourage .."
New Housing Program following H -t: "H- . Contempo_ Develop a
specialized zoning district to insure preservation of Contempo Mobile
Home Park.."
H -cc: Revise to: "...which provide a minimum of 15% of total units
affordable to low and moderate income households for 40 years, as defined
in policy H-210 Procedures for defining and monitoring..."
H-ff: Add to end. 'Mon! tor affordability of second units"
H-gg(a): Revise to read. "Designate for residential and public park or
neighborhood serving commercial use; possibly combine residential with...
Potential for approximately 85-90 multiple family units at medium
density, dependent on mitigation of hazardous materials "
H-gg(b): Revise to read: "...Potential for approximately 50-55 multiple
family units at medium density in an affordable project."
6 Ju!; 12, 1985
H-gg(f): Delete
RECREATION GOALS, POLICIES AND PR06RAMS
R-5: Revise to read "...in larger new residential development projects in
Lincoln, West end, Dominican and freeway -oriented Northgate East
projects, as these areas..."
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT GOALS, POLICIES AND PR06RAMS
NE -2: Delete the second clause "...or placement of such lands in open
space access easements".
NE -17: Second paragraph, third-fourth line: Revise to read "...reserve
areas for flood control, transition areas..."
G'ouncil DirPctioli RPteir7 ..'S font sPtbec* for c-rPPx•s end P,t r11jdP thPm
from i &tlerrds sFtbea, proyisiolz • e c lllo'' col7crelP llrnad drel apai! 0
from thF 50' W011.end sPtberk• rotelrr thF 211T foot sPtbec.4' from top of crPPl.
P&V' fo,r IbP .Sery AOfWl C&Rdl. eXOMPt gPh7J7&APrP01/71 V rPPI.gP H•011el7ds
sPtbeck IenyuegP to stetP ernfrPr7y o»•nPrmey eptly fore M•BipPr if it
r&7PLa dPmofTStretPd thea thPA7ropo.,Pd gotbarl• ii,ould edPquetelyprotoct
the yeluP of the J Pt1Wd hebitBt, end rorrsidPr e broadPning of J biYPr from
wetlands fill policy forAuburn,, St. ere& sitePl7 h0J+' s1 tP effects
SYfrrounding pro FrtiF 'Pco,�7rr� �dFd modificetlo,� c�?�sistFr�t »Atli
Add New Natural Environment Policy prior to NE -20: "Wetlands.
Wetlands are fragile natural resources subject to flooding, erosion,
soil -bearing capacity limitations, and other hazards. In addition they are
resources of special significance due to their functions for wildlife
habitat, pollution control, floodwater passage, aquifer recharge, erosion
control, education, scientific study, open space and recreation. The City
will vigorously pursue protection of wetland resources through: first,
avoidance and provision of setbacks from wetlands, and second, if any fill
of wetland, is proposed and cannot reasonably be avoided (or if
alternatives would be clearly environmentally superior after thorough
environmental review) a requirement of a minimum of two acres of
mitigation (onsite or offsite) for every acre of wetland lova. A property
owner may apply to the City for a waiver of this policy if the property
7 Jur-, 12, 1988
owner can demonstrate that implementation of this policy would
substantially interfere with anter reasonable economic use of the property.
Proposed- Additionally, a property owner may seek a waiver for small,
isolated wetlands an acre or less in size where the landowner can
demonstrate no net loss in quantity or quality to the satisfaction of the
Department of Fish and Game or similar wildlife agency "
NE -20: Revise as follows: "Wetland Buffer Areas_ Buffers shall be
provided between development projects and adjacent wetlands (as
identified/referenced on Map GP-_) Generally, a minimum 50 foot
setback from wetlands shall be maintained for structures. Wider setbacks
(100 feet ideally) will be required on larger parcels through project
review. Creeks (See Policy NE -17), existing concrete lined drainageways,
and the San Rafael Canal (between Highway 101 and the western boundary
of Pickleweed Park --See Policy CB -6) are excluded from this policy. A
property owner may apply for a waiver to this setback policy if the
property owner can demonstrate that the proposed setback adequately
protects the value of the wetland habitat to the satisfaction of the
Department of Fish and Game or similar wildlife agency, or if the property
owner can demonstrate that implementation of this policy would
substantially interfere with anu reasonable economic use of the property."
New Natural Environment Policy_ NE- _ Spinnaker Pt_ V_ Exempt
Spinnaker Point V from the 50 foot wetlands setback provision as it is a
late phase of master planned residential subdivision where no design
changes are proposed, it has previously received all approvals, and needs
to be completed due to neighborhood nuisance aspects.
New Natural Environment Policy: "Diked Baylands. Diked Baylands
as identified on Map GP-_ serve as a buffer between urban and tidal
areas, contribute to improved water quality in the Bay by trapping or
removing pollutants from runoff and wastewater, act as interim storage
basins for stormwater runoff and flood waters that coincide with high
tides, buffer land areas from storms, high tides and erosion, provide
habitat areas for threatened and endangered species, provide logical
"mitigation bank" areas and should be protected."
New Natural Environment Policy_ -Mineral Resource Sites_
Protect designated mineral resource sites from temporary or permanent
land uses onsite or offsite which would preclude or inhibit mineral
e„traction to meet market demand.”
8 Jul•ti 12, 1980
New Natural Environment Policy. -Mineral Resource Buffers.
Protect designated mineral resource sites by providing buffers between
mineral extraction areas and areas with land uses incompatible with
mining."
NE -e: Should reference p 303, not p 280 T1 . p .ripf
rr•ith ���r�n� ung of fieri
New Natural Environment Program: "Private Open Space. When
development permits are sought which would result in portions of the site
being retained in privately owned open space, ensure the preservation of
the character of that open space by deed limitations or other means"
New Natural Environment Program: "Wetlands. Adopt a wetlands
overlay ordinance to implement wetlands policy."
New Natural Environment Program: "Threatened and Endangered
Species. If a proposal would impact any area containing threatened and
endangered species, mitigation measures to protect and ensure continued
survival of the species shall be incorporated into the development plan."
New Natural Environment Program: "Houseboats. Consider inclusion
of a houseboat ordinance similar to BCDC's."
SAFETY GOALS, POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
S-18: Revise to read "Rise in Sea Level. Coordinate with local,
regional, state and federal agencies regarding potential nse in sea level,
after informational workshops of Planning Commission, City Council and
public, establish policy for development within flood plain areas."
New Safety Policy: "Hazardous Waste Management. Support
measures to responsibly manage hazardous waste consistent with
protection of the public health, welfare, safety and the environment."
S-g(b). Revise to read "Provision of additional all weather emergency
street connectors throughout the City. These emergency connectors
include the connection of Lincoln Avenue to Los Ranchito:, Road, provision
of the Merrydale Overcrossing over Highway 101, and provision of the Irene
Street crossing of Highway !-500. Maintain existing all weather
connection for emergency vehicle use only from the end of Freitas Park.Aay
to the end of Fawn Drive. Existing fair weather connectors which should
9 J ui•r 12, 19 8 8
be improved for all weather emergency vehicle use only include the end of
Del Ganado Road ."
S—i Revise to read: "Monitor Settlement. Initiate a program to
monitor settlement to assist in identifying potential gravity flow sewer
problems, height problems for levees and for comparison with assumed
projections for such settlement. If accelerated settlement is occuring,
revisions to the City's Title 18 flood protection standards and land use
plans will be considered. The settlement monitoring program would
monitor filled portions of Northgate East and establish bench marks at
regular intervals along Bellam Blvd, Kerner Blvd, Francisco Blvd East,
Canal Street and Andersen Drive. Areas filled prior to 1955 should be
monitored every 5 years, while more recently developed areas should be
monitored every 2 years."
New Safety Program: "Hazardous Waste Management Plan_ When
adopted by the County and State, Incorporate the County Hazardous Waste
Management Plan into the General Plan by reference consistent with City
comments".
New Safety Program: "Levee Maintenance Funding. Evaluate ongoing
levee maintenance costs and potential ways for affected private property
owners to fund levee maintenance such as Assessment or Maintenance
Districts "
New Safety Program: "Water Quality. Evaluate proposed projects for
potential water quality impacts and require sediment basins as part of
grading activities, and grease/oil traps where concentrations of such
pollutants are anticipated, such as recycling centers, restaurants,
supermarkets and auto service uses."
NOISE GOALS, POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
No Changes to goals, policies and programs. However, add source to p. 78
chart: "State Office of Noise Control"
SPECIFIC AREAS POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS
Add policy recommending a neighborhood plan for the Bret Harte At -ea.
10 Jut; 12, 19
RES -8b. Clarify to state "...may be provided for residential projects...
nthPr chengPS' erP noted es meI7 chenges
ST_ VINCENTS/SILVEIRA
61 011761-711 'oll.•rt ? ' L; ; �P� �� or7 P? IlidP Sl { ,'..?CFr r Cr��,i1 �� j rR B•rPt° h7, O li`5;
SarivICa AraB end h6YB Bn A dv1 sory Committee coma bec* ivithln 6-8
months with Pinel rafinPmant of lend use mix of Iend uses within tA.P
fo1ln��7ngeremPtPrs defined by the Council. e 10rrPr Intensity miAnd use
elhornetive foreree 1fiPst ofreilroed tree ., , approtimetaly 6 unitsPPr
acct .. somewhat IPSS' hien ti 1, 000 zquere feet of office. end commerCiB,l
ornPighborhood cnmmPrr-iel uses of /00 000 SQuere feet or less Arpe
Pest of ral lro&d trecks to bP 1 end /F'Ps?rl~'P "
Council Changes end recommended staff modiflcatlons to St.
Ylnr-ants/_�1Is�sIrB SPCtinn cn.7slstPnt With Cnunril direr-tiO;T
Add to Introduction Bac kgreuad to St. Yinee nts/Silveira the top paragraph, p. 85, after
second sentence
"St Yincents School for Boys has operated in Marin County to serve orphaned and at risk
children and youth for 133 years. Today, St. Yi ncent's specializes in helping young boys with
serious emotional and educational problems, serving these children in a variety of foster care,
home-based, day treatment and residential programs. St. Yincent's has served tens of thousands
of children and continues to be a vital social institution in San Rafael." Delete last sentence,
first paragraph. "Until this point in time the ultimate goals and land uses for this area had not
been decided and have remained an important issue."
Revise -Future Role- discussion to read: "The St. Yincents and Silveira properties
represent the largest potential housing opportunity area in the San Rafael Planning Area
Pri merily flat, and separate from established neighborhoods, the properties can accommodate a
variety of housing types
The land use plan retains the existing St. Yincent's School facilities. While primarily a
residential area, some office and commercial uses are also proposed. A neighborhood commercial
center, developed in conjunction with a transit stop, is envisioned to provide a central focal
point to the community. A mix of residential densities are proposed, with lover densities
recommended where maxi mum design flexi biIity is needed to preserve archaeological or wetland
resources. Wetland areas, communitywide vi 3i ble hillsides and ridgeli nes, and streamside
setbacks along Miller Creek are proposed for conservation through the development review
process.
Neighborhood park: facilities are proposed to serve new development in conformance with City
park standard_:. They would be located to centrally serve surrounding development areas and to
take advantage of exceptional site resources such as St. Vincent's hill, Miller Creek or wetland
areas. A potential elementary school site is also proposed within the neighborhood to allots
children to walk to school, although area school children could be accommodated at distant,
currently closed school C-ite east of HighNau 101.
11 July 1 1988
Due to roadway ...fi re emergenc y access.
Areas east... Agriculture, wastewater irrigation and possibly low intensity recreational uses are
proposed uses ...expansion -
Replace SYS policy SYS -1 Land Use with the following "Land Use Advisory Committee
City Council will determine membership of Advisory Committee to come back within 6-8
months with final refinement of the land use mix for the area west of rail road tracks within the
following parameters: a lower intensity mixed use alternative, approximately 6 units per acre
across the proposed (approx ) 360 acre residential development portion of site, somewhat less
than 261,000 square feet of office use, commercial or neighborhood commercial uses of
100,000 square feet or less and conservation areas. General locations of such uses may also be
recommended "
SYS- 2 Delete "The area is outside the City's 5 year Urban Service Area "
SYS -3: Revise to read "Parks shall be proposed in accordance with City recreation standards,
in locations which serve residents well and maximize, enhance or preserve natural or historical
resources An elementary school is also recommended to serve area residents "
SYS -4 Replace existing wording with the following. "Within the overall density total, a mix
of residential densities and housing types should be encouraged. As elsewhere in San Rafael, the
maximum density for the proposed development area is not guaranteed acid will be dependent
upon protecting site resources, including wetlands, excellence in design, etc."
SYS -5: Modify to read: "Generally, low density residential uses should be located on portions
of the site where the greatest design flexibility is needed to preserve site resources, and high
density uses should be located near a central commercial core/transit stop with an orientation
toward the proposed eastside arterial."
SYS- 6 through SYS -13: No changes proposed.
Modify SYS -14 to read: A neighborhood shopping center should be considered to serve the area
and if possible developed in conjunction with a transit stop.
SYS -15 through SYS -21: No changes proposed
Add a new SYS program "Diked Baylands. Request that Marin County extend its Bayfront
Conservation Zoning District to include historic beylands on the St. Yincents!Silveire properties
east of the railroad tracks. That zone designation currently applies to McInnis Park baylands.
Additionally, in the event that this portion of the St. Yi ncents and Silveira properties is ever
proposed for annexation to the City, require that Bayfront Conservation Zone requirements
continue to apply to the area and adopt enabling ordinances."
Add a new SYS program "Wetlands Delineation. Request an "Advance Determination" by
the Corps of Engineer;, regarding the extent of wetlands on the St. Yincents and Silveira
properties as part of any future planni ng studies of the area, and monitor the site duri ng
winters for additional wetland environmental information."
12 July 12, 1988
NORTHGATE
016-3c: Reinsert language inadvertently omitted from earlier draft:
"Development which has provided assessment district funding for
Merrydale Overcrossing improvements may proceed."
Add possibility of a marina to Marin Ranch Airport site policy NG -7
in line 1, p. 91 "...neighborhood convenience center, a marina or golf course,
and possibly a neighborhood park to serve..."
N6-10, Civic Center North p. 91 Add to end: "Wetland buffers and
threatened and endangered species protection are important
considerations for development on this site."
NG -15 Delete references to "Ross Hospital as follows
"Hospital/Residential parcel, Smith Ranch Road. A
hospital -medical office complex will be evaluated on its merits. The
hospital -medical office complex could generate up to three... opportunity
areas. If a hospital is constructed... traffic generation if a
hospital -medical office complex is approved, development potential of
some properties tributary to the Smith Ranch Road/Lucas Valley Road
interchange may have to be reduced... operation. The site provides an
excellent housing development areas ... pond."
DOWNTOWN
DT -29_, p. 97. Clarify last sentence to state: "However, as elsewhere in
the City, street capacity with planned improvements establishes limits to
total development"
Add a new Downtown policy: "DT --Pedestrian Connections. A strong
pedestrian connection shall be provided between the Downtown transit
center and other important destinations such as redevelopment projects on
the f ormer PG&E si to and the Ci ty's Corporati on Yard si te."
FRANCISCO BLVD_ WEST/EAST SAN RAFAEL
7ria7c %/ dl,rf'[-i it Ii ; �'1:�: �T- sr�G'�r���t l /Bre l%fiL % Or-M8j L71-
V-6-c81Jt f)ro) Jto Medium density Ir, Z-0
Ser .r,5.A.F1' A1'f c tsx:,:�rort IEfSS1AP L 1/11 ,W& 51-&
ttfr
vy+ �'- �,• .C.. �. S: 1.
13 July 12, 1988
Overall Future Direction, p_ 103_
Paragraph 1. Delete "higher density" from second line, consistent with
Council actions.
Paragraph 4. line 2' Clarify Bellam Interchange phasing "Phase I
interchange improvements --relocation of the northbound ramps --would
allow approximately half of all remaining potential development at LOS D
operating conditions."
Revise ESR -2 consistent with Council action to state: "Develop well
designed new residential areas at medium densities to provide residential
development opportunities close to jobs, keep costs of units relatively
low, and add to/support the existing residential neighborhood, consistent
with infrastructure capacity_"
Revise ESR -18 consistent with Council action by replacing first line
with: "Medium densities are proposed on major vacant residential
parcels."
Clarify Policies ESR -19 and FOW-19 to state: " ....may be considered for
re -programming to the 1-580/ 101 /Bellam Blvd. interchange Phase I
improvements."
Revise land use designation for City site, end of Bellam, from High Density
Housing to "Neighborhood Serving Commercial or Medium Density
Residential" with the priority being neighborhood serving, and make
corresponding changes to ESR -25, p 106, as follows -
'ESR -25. City Site and adjacent property_ Provide neighborhood
serving uses or an affordable housing project and neighborhood park on the
City owned site at the end of Bellam Blvd. and, potentially, on the former
Sani tati on Di stri ct si te. An economi c f easi bi 1 i ty anal ysi s of the si to f or a
neighborhood shopping center and additional soils studies should be
prepared to identify the most appropriate use. These parcels are described
below,
a City Site. 6 14 acres. Neighborhood Commercial or Medium
Density Residential/Park. If an affordable housing project is
considered, the City will seek a developer able to provide most or all
of the units affordable to low and moderate income households. An
acceptable affordable housing project should pro -gide a variety of
units, excellence in design, with at least 8% affordable to low income
14 Ju:•; ' 21, 190UU
(50-80% of median) and 12% affordable to moderate income (80-100%
of median) households for 40 or more years. The City may set the
land price below market to implement the above action and provide
other incentives. A park site up to 2 acres in size may also be
provided
b. Former Sanitation District Parcel Medium Density
Residential Allow medium density on the 2.5 acre parcel. May be
combined with City site.
ESR -26. Revise as follows: "Allow Medium Density on 26.4 acre
developable portion of the Spinnaker on the Bay site. Densities of up to 10
units per acre are appropriate near the ...... band. Buf f er si to wetl and areas,
which provide habitat to rare and endangered species and. have high
resource value, from the protect "
Revise ESR -27, p. 107, Canalways to state : "Designate and zone 15
acres of the Canalways site at medium density. Approximately 10 acres is
designated for light industrial/office use near Kerner Blvd. Buffer site
wetland areas from the project. The rationale.._ develop'
Add to end of ESR -31, Sen Quentin Ridge 'The exact delineation of
"conservation" and "development" portions of the site on the land use map
is schematic, with development to be limited to the lower, less steep
portion of the site."
Add a new policy_ 'ESR- . Nolan. In accordance with unique and
special circumstances delineated by resolution, allow the property owner
of 9-132-21 to proceed with FAR's consistent with other developed Bahia
properties, recognizing that such an FAR is not guaranteed but must meet
design review and other City standards."
CANAL/BAYFRONT
Revise CB -6 to state "St Vincents/Silveira, rather than "Forth San Rafael"
Revise CB -16 as follows: 'CB -16_ Title Claims. To assist in
redevelopment of affected properties, public trust title claims to the
waterway shall be resolved consistent with objectives enumerated in the
"Canal Land Uses/Maritime" background section and with State Lav,
Chapter 1742. Statutes of 1971, which allows the City to convey or
e.;change, subject to approval of the State Lands Comm i Z.si on, certain
filled lands which are found to be no longer useful or susceptible to use
15 Ju:. 12, 198u
for the public trust purposes of harbors, commerce, navigation, fisheries,
or appurtenances thereto."
Revise CB -23 Allardt's Canal. Negotiate individual settlements of
public trust title claims when property owners of Allardt's Canal
encumbered properties seek to redevelop their propertieZ•, or ,hen other
opportunities arise....."
IMPLEMENTING PROGRAMS REVISIONS
PER 6/24/88 staff report with the following changes: "0 -Ongoing" to be
renamed "C -Current"; H-gg SR Main Treatment Plan Site from 7" to "1";
LU -n from "2" to " I".
LAND USE BACKGROUND
p. 142. Revise Housing Units Projections downward based on Council
actions.
pp. 145 and 155. Delete/Revise Urban Service Area discussion consistent
with Council action.
p. 165. Incorporate the following updated information into the water
supply section of the draft Plan:
"In District work prepared during late 1987, the Water District concluded that the traditional
"net safe yield" Ke., the yield which could be provided based the drought of record with no
conservation) of their system is 30,000 acre feet, although their "operational yield" (e.g., the
amount which can be safely provided if 33%. conservation occurs duri ng a drought) is 35,000
acre feet The District has concluded that they currently need odditional water supplies to
provide a traditional net safe yield for existing customers as well as for new development.
The District will continue to stress water conservation measures in new protects, with large
water users, and through operations (billing, etc) . The District also plans to increase use of
reclaimed water at the Las Gal Iines Valley Sanitary District Plan to provide approximately
1000 acre feet of irrigation water. Third, the agency will employ dry year water conservation
measures, such as alternate day watering requirements, to reduce peak summer demand.
In 1988, the District is seeking to secure water rights to an additional 10,000 acre feet. The
additional 10,000 acre feet (arid 1000 acre feet reclaimed water) would provide a 41,000 acre
feet "net safe yield" capacity and is about 8000 acre feet above existing demand. Of the 10,000
acre feet additional supply, about 1 /3 is needed to serve existing customers and 2/3 would
provide capacity for ne-v development. This amount would be more than adequate to serve San
Rafael Planni ng Area development potential, which is projected to total 1700 acre feet by the
year 2000 and approxi rnatel y 3050 acre feet at full development, and other District
development potential.
16 Jul -f. 12, 1988
The District is also seeking additional start term water supplies from the Sonoma County Water
Agency while they secure long term water rights from other sources. District staff has been told
that water rights are available and are for sale north of Sacramento and in the Central Valley
This water would be transported through the North Bay Aquaduct to Napa and from there would
need to be transported through a new aqueduct to a location near Black Point.
The existing rate structure pays for all previously planned improvements to the District's
system (tanks, lines, reclamation system development, pumps, etc.). New water supply
development would need to be financed through a districtwide bond measure."
p. 168. Include at end of 7th paragraph: "Odor impacts are an additional
consideration_"
CIRCULATION BACKGROUND
p. 181 Revise Highway 101 info. "Highway 101 is projected to need to be
widened to provide continuous high occupancy vehicle and auxiliary lanes
through San Rafael" (EIR 21b)
p. 191. Include Del Presidio/Las Gallinas signal@ $110,000.
p. 192. Revise Traffic Mitigation fee numbers to take into account
revised trip totals and the additional $1 10,000 signal cost.
p. 193. Revise Downtown Traffic Improvement program to delete the
signal intertie and controller upgrade costs as they have received FAU
funding
p_ 194_ State "The relative priorities of the Phase I Beliam Interchange
improvements and..." Further p_ 195, improvement *4, identify as Phase i
Bellam interchange improvements
p. 198. Improvement 010, identify as Phase II Bel Iam interchange
improvements.
HOUSING BACKGROUND
p. 236: Consistent with program H—c state "The City will establish
procedures for "fast track" processing and fee waiver or reductions for
affordable housing projects..."
p. 244: Last sentence of paragraph 4 should read "...Housing policies
were revised in the General Plan to establish a 100 minimun'i affordable
17 July 12, lyui;
housing requirement, and to require that specific density bonuses be
defined for "Affordable Housing Projects"
p. 244: "Evaluation of the owner occupancy provision. " should be deleted
p. 246. Item c be deleted, statement redundant w1th "a" on same page
p. 248: Revise paragraph "a" to read: "To further this end, the city has
established a Housing Fund earmarked..."
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT BACKGROUND
p. 292: Add "ponds and" between "30 acre McNear's (Quarry" and "Fresh
brackish marsh"
p_ 294: Replace "Point Reyes Birds Beak" with "California Clapper Rail"
p. 295: Revise California Clapper Rail "...sited at mouth of San Rafael
Creek and Gal linas Creek to "sited at San Rafael Creek and marshes of
Gallinas Creek and San Pablo Bay." This involves a map change also.
p. 295: Add to California Black Rail "sited at .... and the mouth of San
RafaelCreek"
p. 295: Under Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse add "Civic Center North project
site and levees of the Marin Ranch Airport site"
p. 298: Add the Terra Linda Sleepy Hollow Divide.
p. 301: Revise Barbier description to note that it was not a gift
completely but a combination of a reduction in price and cash paid by the
City.
SAFETY BACKGROUND
p_ 322. Revise the identified elevations to state "MSL as based on
National Geodetic Vertical Datum" and then all statements should refer to
"MSL" only.
18 J ul-y 12, 19 88,
MAPS
Overall Land Use Map Revisions:
Revise land use designations on vacant East San Rafael parcels from "high
Density" to "Medium Density"
Revise 157 Woodland from Low to Medium Density.
Eliminate the specific "golf course" designation from the St.
Vincents/Silveira area east of the railroad tracks;
Identify the Contempo Marin Mobile Home Park lagoon as "conservation".
Reference wetland areas on all land use maps as follows: "Important -
Ref er
Important:Refer to the wetlands map GP-_ for information on site wetlands."
Modify "Hillside Residential" boundaries In Upper Fremont Road area to
include certain large hillside parcels as mapped.
If decision on Seastrand parcel is final prior to printing, modify
Seastrand open space parcel to"Low Density Residential'; otherwise, leave
as "Open Space" with notation that it may be revised to Low Density
Residential" dependent upon further research.
Revise the West Marin Island land use designation from "Open space" to
"Hillside Resource Residential"
Revise parcels on the south side of second Street between East Street and
Miraflores from a split "High/Low" density designation to "Medium
Density"
If scenic restriction has been removed from parcels 186-520-06 and 11,
revise land use designation from "Open Space" to "Hillside Resource
Residential"
Revise 180-161-15 and 21 to "Lots, Density Residential'
1s Jul•; 12, 19"; 8,
Include the new Wetlands and Diked Historic Baylands Map in
Natural Environment section with following minor
modi f i cati ons:
Clarify and include on wetlands map two wetland areas plus small
ponds: on Quarry site
State on map that `Wetlands are dynamic areas. The extent and
location of site wetlands on this map are approximate. While major
wetlands and potential wetlands are mapped, other wetlands as
defined in the General Plan may be unmapped and would be identified
through project review."
Add to Creeks and Watersheds Map GP -23: "Note: The Army Corps of
Engineers regulates all tributaries to the Bay to the point at which they
have a defined bed and bank. Some of these small tributaries may be
unmapped but identified through project review."
Miscellaneous Map Changes: Map GP -2: Include St.
Vincents/Silveira area in the Urban Service Area Map 6P-9: mark
Margarita Island as Secured Open Space, Map GP -14: mark Margarita
Island as Existing Open Space, Publicly owned; Map 6P-16: Major Biotic
Communities. show additional wetlands on St. Vincents/Silveira. Have
been identified on proposed Wetlands Map as "Potential Wetland" to be
specifically identified through a Corps Jurisdiction determination. Map
GP -17: Revised locations for Clapper Rail and Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse
based on Northgate Plan EIR information; Map 6P-23: Extend the middle
tributary of the south fork of Gallinas Creek to Ranr_hitos Road.
APPENDIX A- GLOSSARY
Add definition for "Possible", as follows: "It is available and capable
of being done after taking into consideration cost. existing technology
and logistics in light overall project purposes."
Provide a "Wetland" definition as follows: "Wetlands are those areas
that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a
frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal
circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted
for life in saturated soil conditions (This is the same as the U.S.
Array Corps of Engineers definition) "
2€! July 12, 1988
Add a definition of "fast track processing" as follows: "Fast track
processing" is the processing of a project ahead of other projects
submitted at the same time but still providing for all regular reviews
of a project."
Provide a definition of "Diked Baylands" ac� follows "D1kpd Baylands
are the historic Bay marshlands and Bay waters, as shown on the
Historic Marshland and Shoreline Map, which have since been diked."
Appendix B
Revise traffic allocations consistent with Council actions and update
listing.
Appendix 1
Modify 157 Woodland land use designation from "Low Density" to "Medium
Density Residential"
t1
JLily 12', 1988
Additions to Attachment A
adopted 7/ 18/88
City Council policy revisions (underlined) adopted as a result of
new comments from EAH, Marin Audubon, and the Sierra Club -
Add New Natural Environment Policy prior to NE -20: "Wetlands. Wetlands are
fragile natural resources subject to flooding, erosion, soil - bearing capacity ii mitations, and
other hazards In addition they are resources of special significance due to their functions for
vildlife habitat, pollution control, floodwater passage, aquifer recharge, erosion control,
education, scientific study, open space and recreation. The City will vigorously pursue
protection of wetland resources through. first, avoidance and provision of setbacks from
wetlands, and second, if any fill of wetlands is proposed and cannot reasonably be avoided (or if
alternatives would be clearly environmentally superior after thorough environmental review) a
requirement of a minimum of two acres of mitigation (onsite or offsite) for every acre of
wetland lost When fill is proposed. replacement of wetlands should be of at least eoual oualitu.
nearbu, and whenever possi ble, completed prior to anu protect construction A property owner
may apply to the City for a waiver of this policy if the property owner can demonstrate that
implementation of this policy would substantially interfere with economicallu viable use of the
property additionally, a property owner may seek a waiver for small, isolated wetlands an acre
or less in size where the landowner can demonstrate no net loss in quantity or quality to the
satisfaction of the Citu after consulation with the Department of Fish and Game or similar
wildlife agency and the public_.."
NE -20: Revise as follows- "Wetland Buffer Areas. Buffers shall be provided between
development projects and adjacent wetlands (as identified/ referenced on Map GP--)
Generally, a minimum 50 foot setback from wetlands shall be maintained for structures. Wider
setbacks (100 feet ideally) will be. required on larger parcels through project review. Creeks
(See Policy NE -17), existing concrete lined d rai nagewa ys, and the San Rafael Canal (between
Highway 101 and the western boundary of Pickleweed Park --See Policy C6-6) are excluded
from this policy ;, property ov.-ner may appi y for a waiver to this setback policy if the
property owner can demon:trate that the proposed set bee k adequately protects the vaIue of the
wetland habits` to the satisfaction of the Citu after consultation with the Department of Fish and
Garai or sirrnlar'wildlife agency, and the public or if the property owner can demonstrate that
implementation of this policy would substantially interfere with econornicailu viable use of the
pror,r% "
H-20 Revise as follows: 'H-20. Affordable Housing Projects_ Projects with high
percentages of units affordable to low and moderate income households are desired, high priority
proie,ts. Provide density/traffic allocation bonuses, from a limited number of affordable
housing reserve trip; as noted in the Appendices, "fast track prose -sing", and waiver rreducticir
of fee ---,to proiects'which provide a minimurn of 1 5�' of total units affordable to low in(Wrle
450-80� of median) and rnoderat.r- income (80- 1003 of rrlediall) households, with at least 6
for- low iricc rnp households for at least 40 year. To achieve a densitu bonus, units must be
ccn trurteij on,ite, and generally, only if the main project is age restricted can density bonus
unit_ be r_.e restricted Farther, use of density bonuses is lin ited to medium and high density
land ;,;e Where :5T or more of the Unit`, are fcr li'w lniU!me hoU:;eholds, a one
-it;- rg tie: rl' to) nU: up to 4 cto' rc rnau be �:,irl_�ider ed iG appi Gprlak
- LJii'•:r rltl!'w`II are•., or( 3itY5
greater Tl,.�n 'ir 000 sq ft in size where de;i7n criteria can tie met "
� y',
a
G.�. RE-:-SOLU-rjoN 8
6 d? & i t sN� � lei -E
TO u
� r,� �
Vo
E " �Y
a i $ _ o = o �d m �
g d
'' ' d cyNf m
, ep
co m
O O C
r �C �,
N
W N m� g E op_� Nim s�i�
r � � N d e�ta1 N U �� eC0 �(hF E 4S
= WZCC ON C
pts°
W a�
LU
r O 'O ArRi d e0 d C O N; S S C
Q C 'O� N N =Ui C rtY :a��q mf CD
Lco
is V
d 0
d'> eSNN o� ti u a o� , c c ea T:L c E v n,
a it — 0
Lrl
o Ln mgo
N C Gpj N p io N
c? f6 N z r S m {A Cp N A m C ccU L
Q � � � p 9 CNN � 'Em W � G � � L ±� � �� GG
4 E �C `° $�t c co $ ee ea N$''� ec c m'._ C `°
41
ifo t uj
uj
a> �p4EQ v'O
i... QVQa: act .
Z •
J
a � �
Q N
¢ cc
ul Lo
V
u.
Lou
iim S�
¢ Z ���
'4
N N ON �Co1S1 W z�G
QO
CL w
Summary - 7
rn
0
i
t7 7 6j
6) 'O
Ln
�• g Gop E � `.S�L �• � � c, N�
O pD�
�O N O d O C
j•.nth
`bN10In 0
do E o �y�7v
N G N 3
o
H4
.c N L� o� i •� o E .L � v
GQ�wN G�V N NL co
N4Li�N 6�L
w[-gN ea c o ,ter c�„CON
�N
co '7 G cN0 G O N .G '0 G w N co
p a'
'Its N Q V N N C to 2' N d c~6
EL Q co d�dE �L
ip
—0 '0 0-0
7 0 Gcp iC d ca L P a O,co
oQ-�Atc..B
tg
NNOia-
` W ow w m c4 co in C p Q
Z A G Cco
� N r N Q
i
`L
tT0
,g
33 `c
d
00
e�o:ea
G N e0 Q
w roc
`L W
sumR,a^1 , 8
,�'. g • � g
o
•Q� N � •s d � � cp Q O O .. � � Q t0
N O
Q �N
G� • UN N O Q '� N O d W (l� O c� k E ,sip
' 4
eU� G ;
to
7Z-Tn%Gtn N�`L�rGt y o�
�4 dgc�a�3 C r'co�o�4 dg��-J'yV 'yom
Q �
O cv
� d
Q c4 G 3-0, 7 �G 'Q' td G i7 co t4
PRO
y
Gip Q G p •
W� d uv �� •
Q p'ON N cGc a'
w�A
ca
N Gs D O�� d
C 10 N Sa
�G N Og't D d m C N
m
���mwrit,
�
.0 °� r ca g
a gIrE
r �Ltc pZ
e m D qty s oo =c.p o d t�tZ p
) ig ca t Z co �-
ti1 co Tj �6 .E S p. y tb eC 9
IA
co
-� ^� � •
O G r m 'O Gds N
to
coca �j5
•
vN �
✓� 32v
U
t 6�
O
C L w J
N� cr.to
Za) Zc tt�0 a�
"ia C o r
a) 2Z� to cc E a
N G = �f mZ C`
Q
N G ^ d Q� �O0 J�
Z N_ �� �fp1 9 is
G O$ w
Z_ cp � Z tpOC� w
��`uJ N C g ot'�'��v
Q C gj t O W0.--
13
t N
d Nca viSi2 Q
C pp
c E
.44
cn 9>o9'$�� tE C:tc7 e
Q G^p>j4p d� GN GZvgzv 017o
LU12
V ,.. a
ZO G O fL�
TCS W yV
0 m V ,� 0
i�
y tD N toNNr p
_ tp
d > ti L t4 C
�cz
g IXm pZ S1� ccc�'' �
S `. x x
i�
�e
j c 1 to - c
Q C G Q O O D O
55 � G•
W i 8 J d �� N Q aXito
V) n� a O v $oma z
aul
z ) .
U
Summary . 10
�) fit
J -o V
�•^^ ��N;
or
YJ � Tb d N
J G Q
t rD �W U g N pN§� C C d
is N N 4
DJ w cd t Y o
cn J o U z 51 eYo .4 IR N
N" uj t "•cj g " d G7
Z? a gcnUV g `° �N a 2 '� 0 E
.' �O c eo•EcjU
mg �pp a E
G1.�r Q �f7N�(n '� gy C
�aD._ o �lJg�jQ cL1N a
Euj
CG to 3U� =° C�tv
L) O N oZ J N �� g'N.0 �� meo 1Uo Qc� o W�..N._
ev c ;nJ o
.o, c�E ZU w ¢oo c d y�� Q !-n
c�
� N Y tC U_ r � N G) t4 � c� •J
cn rho c� �c�av;�U�Z� eta °'Ecr
LU g� _ o N a co ca C C c� $ 'E d Q' --'o Wr a
� >,c_ �o� Elo stat E—� � Y •g
G d t� N O d c0 N d C> U? y = G) m V ..
d''cQCco��ebC�y��n�� m$d= a� cin�
oS '
CJ '' N(�JJ > •
tn
ZA Cc
1- d . •
Z cCp d � •o
C C t w N Z C
L4 "D O C G
�_ E
�8 �_ a ��m ���'
Crp
; e > c
iC Ca O vOi G) vii =p L C G�
VJ (n 15 e0 y U d .St ss� rj C �Q Z
t9 Si N ll, fi'U.
lUa i
Q Z Q o V Q •
J • •
Summary • 11
tC G p -2 N Q W Z Q d�
� c A• c� � � � � oo"Q
� N
tb cC O L = N V N P
C ii' cfl C
>NQ c�'� N gi
8v_� p?`�
N N N_ d T
Z C CU') L t0 ` lC O o U O�•► r
J p
J�'u7 r
s c? Q Cn cl °' 'g � '� a� Z � ° � Q 3
r
p N �N eoJ 17
-j
GNi ¢aE Oz
7 8� Or-
'N N N N C 11J E to Sd O U
d J C Q� Ui N Z N Z OU
>W.i' 4� �'
��� -og C �J O �D`V��� $ NO=NyLL oto
> fN6 .Q C� Ce0 G .- y C 0> p aa N
d t0 M J d d;~ ` Ry G� C O
JEN°'Ea��SO�cng'D NtoU;$
3oCn
4>a?yia�c �" - p $Sd�Oca
r UN 2cI G
c _n. �f �
i p y C C C U O c` $> MO c0 a p
7; zd C d O M m F e0 d p d O$ a
v 3D'
N B :
E
N
�s
>
3�0
Ln
LU
o g �
s
' o
oa m O
T5 N �
N
U a l
W
Summary - 12
0[ U ►i as
c� lb ec
a
C1 d� JU CVO
$fid t C Uo tecta rr
r�
m J W J v N4 ,�Z
CO
ea Q $ a Q
Dz p 0t0 C �� y��j ptC�C escV
C; R W i I Ll
_ y _ 0
J T
;w J C O �� � N
CPL O .� _y C C O C C O^ st J U
N � ; .Sic no cl) o mN Ln ea
�w Od �Cn L O NL 1C > N�
M E N N M Z Mr 'D 's 7 N E> a `� • Q ►- N L .V d
E�3�eog,"mg eaN �+ cma� c viQ-��ma�ivii' o
d N AW d•- eNa� m ��i U lc= cg;•�
mNcz�°dy ��N E
r- U) L L e�0 U N e0 N d p p O� t O > >Q Q ; d
W Oji C LU L C ca O Cfl v� a rA C g��� �-� Q eC
3 S? o N c NZ 4�N o o Ea'+z
LU
Nc'
H
eg
m� r4d�Za'F S€��-V.2U 0 06 CL
46 U Lu dS
C N S d v�� d c o �W gUS mww E
m
r � .
Summary - 13
4
e�
o
p
E
G
U
4
tC
m
U
•p � N
S
Tti �Q y �
Li
3
>
oma"
z
o
Y
Q
E
0)z
b�
�CD La
I --a
p
0
w d S�
a w
CL U
cc
Q
Summary - 13
�p J
r � a
� d
-P IrA
r.
�c
rl-
4�NN
Gco Z •'G� cat
� v
0>
�, � i G y_ Ji � � �•�� �, d � _ � 'Njc i1 d � •iJN
G
'S > cco-
G
�0 ft O 7
O N Q y t0 �p d G'6,
G p G t
$ N
W co d Q m> ; 'E'i d ca ca Q to v• E—
9
Z G �� p07 d p CSV
Q
Q
G p !n O d
o ;ut°QO ccs
ddo�Ez'—
G 4
yQt N N ,gypv' G
G G• G
Et_ 4_cd$V)`°
wo $ � to s
m
Nto
mcoo,06
4�
W sib y W s Z 9$ N •
4 zi
N Q 9 3 0• `tb °' O
a �
CL.-
g summay - � a
N O N d SOC O
O tO C cti N N C �c4 O N c`s Q
G " .
LO
= N
C c - O J
p G
co � O L
N
N Z O V V E v O
M Z d C Z VR3
5z
Q O N c
A j N 7 v
o pC� o �Eod o�Na�d n�gL
c0
ob15 U�
— p d � � cacoa
� G �' 4 oink C) °� °' c7 N d�Z�•C9J •
co
O
4 0 CD
• Q
J
CP 0
� c d
J � O
O
E c ot5 T g
N
N d
� 9 D�
'Ecs 2� N c C taj d v =9 O a
r '� • o a.
N W .Q' Jr -
3; 3
Summarl -15
f
n�
O
Nun N d eG
ft LoCy t`0 N ob
t rn ur)7 w N G-
d CG N to N
J 4 N QC
rn a to S
to ✓ � N to tp to
�
y J N t0 _ N
p a� Q; N O a eCc d J ea
7
64
Cu- to j J
Cq
to
L N to J r cr rpNt1'! cp
L t% L v' C C 7 �2 7 C
U t0 l� tU
C cCC fo CI) N d y C
tg G T d 0 N N p$
t co
G p T
to
y G GLn
co
y,
comas
4) IWW
o > v.52 T'g O �
cnG; o� Ed >Qc`ot0 ��A
w `\''�`� m w (p P�G 4ai; WEU_
o $
C a
z — cN N -9Q
O C C N QED 0) d JV JW
1-
2 =
t
c
Ln
a 0 cRcc
$ULD.
cc
m�
� s 'n
c
z �U) �sv
$ $ 7-
7W-
57, W
LO
)
a
5urnrnah' . 16