HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Resolution 14575 (Appeal 800 Mission Ave)ATTACHMENT 1 -1
RESOLUTION NO. 14575
RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL DENYING AN APPEAL (AP18-002) AND
UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S JULY 10, 2018 CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF A
USE PERMIT (UP17-030) AND AN ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT (ED17-090)
TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW, 88-BED, ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY WITH
GARAGE PARKING SPACES AND ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS (GRADING, DRAINAGE
AND LANDSCAPING) ON TWO VACANT DOWNTOWN LOTS LOCATED AT 800 MISSION AVE.
(FORMERLY 1203 AND 1211 LINCOLN AVE.; APNS: 011-184-08 & -09)
WHEREAS, on August 7, 2006, the City Council certified an Environmental Impact Report
(EIR), adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and conditionally approved an Environmental
and Design Review Permit, Use Permit and Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map to allow demolition of
an historic motor court and construction of a 36-unit multifamily residential condominium building on the
project site; and
WHEREAS, on July 11, 2007, a building permit was issued for the demolition of the prior
historic motor court at 1203 Lincoln Ave. and the residential building on the adjacent parcel, at 1211
Lincoln Ave., and all improvements on these parcels were subsequently demolished and removed; and
WHEREAS, in 2008, 2009, 2011, 2013, 2015 and 2016, the project entitlements were extended
either automatically by the State legislature, through extension of the approved subdivision map, or by
the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the approved entitlements on the site expired on August 7, 2018; and
WHEREAS, on October 19, 2017, the new owners of the site submitted Use Permit (UP17-030)
and Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED17-090) applications, proposing a new project: a
new, 88-bed assisted living facility with memory care services, garage parking spaces, landscaping,
drainage and vehicle access improvements on the site; and
WHEREAS, on June 5, 2018, the City of San Rafael Design Review Board (Board) conducted a
duly-noticed public meeting and reviewed the proposed new project and unanimously recommended
approval conditioned on the project returning to the Board for final review of details on landscaping,
exterior lighting and outdoor terrace areas, prior to building permit issuance; and
WHEREAS, the proposed project changes have been reviewed with the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and staff has found that since the historic motor court was
demolished in 2007, the proposed project is now eligible for a categorical exemption to CEQA review
(Class 32; In-Fill Development Projects) with the mitigation measures from the original EIR requiring
documentation of the prior historic motor court on the project site as a condition to allow the CEQA
exemption; and
WHEREAS, on July 10, 2018, the San Rafael Planning Commission (Planning Commission)
held a duly-noticed public hearing on the new project, including a Use Permit (UP17-030) and an
Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED17-090), accepted all oral and written public testimony
and the written report of the Community Development Department Planning staff, and closed said
hearing on that date; and
WHEREAS, on July 10, 2018, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 18-04 (4-2-1 vote;
Robertson and Schoppert nay and Lubamersky absent), approving the Use Permit (UP17-030) and the
ATTACHMENT 1 -2
Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED17-090) and accepting the CEQA determination, subject
to the following additional conditions: 1) Accept the property owner’s voluntary offer to increase the
affordable housing in-lieu fee payment, from $318,095.36 to $500,000; 2) Require the applicant to
submit a Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDMP), as prepared by a licensed traffic
engineer, identifying strategies and recommendations for reducing employee/staff vehicle trips and
minimizing parking and traffic impacts; and 3) Reserve the right to require additional traffic measures,
such as pavement markings and signs, both on-site and off-site, to improve vehicle circulation; and
WHEREAS, on July 17, 2018, an appeal of the Planning Commission’s action was filed by a
group of three (3) residents. Generally, the appeal points question the proposed commercial use on a
residential-zoned site, the adequacy of the proposed parking, and the adequacy and process in
determining the required affordable housing component.; and
WHEREAS, on September 4, 2018, the City Council held a duly-noticed public hearing to
consider the Appeal (AP18-002), accepting and considering all oral and written public testimony and
the written report of the Community Development Department Planning staff; and
WHEREAS, the custodian of documents which constitute the record of proceedings upon which
this decision is based is the Community Development Department; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby denies the Appeal
(AP18-002) finding and determining that the points of the appeal cannot be supported for the following
reasons:
Appeal Point #1 - The project approval is not in accordance with the General Plan and
findings required to approve the Use Permit.
Response: General Plan consistency is determined by reviewing and weighing the goals and
policies of all elements of the San Rafael General Plan 2020. Both the San Rafael General Plan
2020 and case law interpreting general plan requirements recognize that the General Plan is a
collection of competing goals and policies, which must be read together and not in isolation. In
reviewing a project for consistency with the General Plan, the City is required to ‘balance’ the
competing goals and policies. Case law has determined that a project “need not be in perfect
conformity with each and every policy” and that “no project could completely satisfy every policy
stated in the General Plan, and that state law does not impose such a requirement.” (Sequoyah
Hills Homeowners Association vs. City of Oakland (1993) 23 Cal.App.4th 704).
The project has been reviewed for consistency with the San Rafael General Plan 2020. A complete
analysis of the pertinent policies and programs is presented in the General Plan Consistency Table
(Exhibit 4; 7/10/18 Planning Commission Packet). Overall, while the project has the potential to
conflict with one or more General Plan policies, it would be consistent with most of the applicable
General Plan policies.
The subject property is a choice housing site for any sort of housing due to its close proximity to the
Downtown and the project proposes residential development, where residents, guests and staff
would re-activate a portion of Lincoln and Mission Aves. and help contribute to the City’s long -term
goal of creating ‘alive after 5’ activity in the Downtown and provide economic opportunities to
Downtown businesses. The City supports the development of housing, at all levels, to help meet the
needs of all San Rafael residents; this includes our older population. The proposed project would
assist the City in its goal of providing options for older residents who wish to “age-in-place”.
ATTACHMENT 1 -3
On July 10, 2018, the Planning Commission reviewed and conditionally approved the project,
including the Use Permit to allow the proposed “large residential care facility” use on the site. At that
time, the Planning Commission determined that all findings were adequately met, including
consistency with the applicable General Plan policies. A complete analysis of the project’s
consistency with the findings required for Use Permit approval is presented in the Zoning Ordinance
Consistency Table (Exhibit 5; 7/10/18 Planning Commission Packet).
Appeal Point #2 – The project proposes a commercial use on a residential-zoned site.
Response: The site is located within the High Density Residential (HR1) District zoning. All densities
of housing are permitted on the site by right. However, residential care facilities, which include
assisted living facilities such as this project, are also allowed on the site with a Use Permit by the
Planning Commission. Staff has determined the project proposes a commercially-operated
residential use (assisted living facility) and is comparable to a hotel use. The proposed facility would
provide rooms or suites without individual kitchens and offer ancillary service opportunities to the
residents like communal dining options, fitness, barber/salon, cinema and activities areas. None of
these services would be available to the public or non-residents.
Although a good case could be made that conventional, residential market rate housing in this
prime downtown location may be a better use for the City and Downtown, the issue is that the City’s
regulations, including both the General Plan 2020 and San Rafael Municipal Code Title 14 (the
“Zoning Ordinance”), allow for both market rate housing and assisted living facility uses in the High
Density Residential General plan land use designation and the High Density Residential Zoning
District. This assisted living facility is considered a residential care facility (large) under the Zoning
Ordinance. Residential Care Facilities (large) for non-disabled persons are a conditionally permitted
use in the Zoning District. Therefore, the use is allowable, and the use permit allows the city to
screen for potential impact and apply conditions. Denial of the use solely based on the type of use
is not legally permissible. The Commission grappled with this consideration in their deliberations.
Ultimately, they did find that although they would rather see market rate housing at this site, the City
does not have the authority to deny the use based on the use itself. There is also a need for senior
housing throughout the community to allow seniors in need of care to move out of larger single-
family homes into smaller units or care facilities, thereby freeing up larger market rate dwellings for
families
On July 10, 2018, the Planning Commission reviewed and conditionally approved the Use Permit,
and the Environmental and Design Review Permit, subject to adding three new conditions, two of
which were intended to further mitigate unforeseeable impacts of this commercially-operated
residential use. One of these new conditions (Condition 3; UP17-030) requires the applicant to
submit a Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDMP), prepared by a licensed traffic
engineer, for identifying strategies and recommendations for reducing employee/staff vehicle trips
and minimizing parking and traffic impacts. This TDMP is subject to review and approva l by the
Department of Public Works and Community Development Department, who reserve the right to
require modifications to the TDMP. The applicant also agrees to incorporate all recommendations
outlined in the TDMP, including modifications required by the City, during the occupancy of the site
by the approved use. In another of these new conditions (Condition 92; ED17-090), the Department
of Public Works/City Engineer reserves the right to further review traffic conditions, both on- and off-
site circulation patterns generated by the use, and require improvements, such as pavement
striping and signage. The applicant also agrees to incorporate these recommended on- and off-site
improvements.
Appeal Point #3 - The parking proposed by the project is inadequate.
ATTACHMENT 1 -4
Response: The Zoning Ordinance identifies parking requirements for residential care facilities. The
adopted parking standards for ‘large’ residential care facilities, like this project, require the following
parking:
•One (1) parking space for each five (5) clients; plus
•One (1) parking space for each staff person or employee on a maximum staffed shift.
Of the 88 beds proposed by the project, 63 beds are proposed in the assisted living portion and 25
beds are proposed in the memory care portion. These 63 beds of assisted living would require 13
on-site parking spaces for the residents. The 25 beds of memory care would create no parking
demand since memory care residents are prohibited from vehicle ownership due to cognitive
difficulties. In addition, 29 on-site parking spaces would be also required for the maximum
anticipated staffed shift of 29 employees. The total required parking for the project is 42 on -site
parking spaces. The project proposes to provide 40 on-site parking spaces.
Therefore, the project includes a request for a Parking Modification, through the Use Permit
application submittal, to reduce the parking requirement by two (2) parking spaces, from 42 to 40
on-site parking spaces, based on the historic operational needs from other Aegis assisted living
facilities similar in size of the project. The project supported this request with a traffic and parking
study prepared by Transpogroup, dated May 30, 2018 (Exhibit 6 of 7/10/18 Planning Commission
Packet). which anticipates peak parking demand of 31 parking spaces for residents, guest and staff,
based on a proposed 88-bed assisted living facility. All requests for Parking Modification require the
review and recommendation of both the Community Development Director and the City Engineer,
and the approval of the Planning Commission. The Community Development Director, through
Planning staff, and the City Engineer support this request for Parking Modification, concurring with
the analysis and findings in the submitted traffic and parking study, and determining that parking
demand would be further reduced by the site’s close proximity to the adjacent SMART Downtown
station and the Bettini Transit Center which is located approximately 1,000’ southeast of the site.
On July 10, 2018, the Planning Commission reviewed and conditionally approved the project,
including the Parking Modification request, subject to adding three new conditions that included the
requirement that the applicant submit a TDMP, as prepared by a licensed traffic engineer,
identifying strategies and recommendations for reducing employee/staff vehicle trips and minimizing
parking and traffic impacts and the applicant agrees to incorporate these TDMP recommendations
(Condition 3, UP17-030).
Appeal Point #4 - The process for determining the affordable housing requirement during the
Planning Commission hearing was flawed and the affordable housing requirement itself is
inadequate.
Response: The Zoning Ordinance (Section 14.16.030) requires that all residential and non-
residential development projects comply with the City’s adopted inclusionary (affordable) housing
requirement. For residential projects, a certain percentage of the total units as affordable are
required to be set aside as affordable, with the amount of required affordability ranging from 10%-
20%, depending on the size of the development. Section 14.16.030 also requires affordable
housing for non-residential project based on the affordable housing need that would be generated
by the employment from the new non-residential use. For non-residential developments, the
requirement can be satisfied through the creation of on-site units or more commonly, through the
payment of an in-lieu fee.
ATTACHMENT 1 -5
Historically, it has been difficult to administer the affordable housing requirement fo r assisted living
facility types of projects, given that the aside from the rent/housing component to the use, there is
also a service component (medical, food, care, etc.) of the use which would not be subject to the
affordable housing ordinance. For example, if the affordable housing requirement was imposed on
a care facility such as this, the rent/housing portion of the unit would be set at affordable rates, but
the non-housing services (care/services/medical) would not. That would put residents who qualify
for affordable unit in a care facility in a difficult position of having the discounted rent for which they
qualify, but not being able to afford the care/medical/service costs.
The General Plan includes a policy goal (Housing Policy H-12c) which encourages staff to explore
the feasibility of requiring affordable housing units in assisted living facilities as, for example,
reduced housing costs uncoupled from and access to market-rate services costs. Since the
adoption of the current General Plan, the City has approved a total of two (2) assisted living
facilities, both within the past eight (8) months. Until recently, staff has not seen the urgent need to
review the affordable housing requirement for assisted living facilities.
This project proposes an assisted living facility with memory care services, which is subject to the
non-residential inclusionary housing requirement. The Zoning Ordinance includes a table (SRMC
Table 14.16.030-3) with the number of affordable units required by development type. There are
only five development categories listed in the table: 1) office/R&D, 2) retail/restaurant/personal
services, 3) manufacturing/light industrial, 4) warehouse or 5) hotel uses. For other uses, the
Community Development Director is tasked to determine the number of units based on comparable
factors to the uses that are listed in the development categories.
The proposed facility would provide rooms or suites without individual kitchens and offer ancillary
services to the residents like communal dining options (both indoor and outdoor), fitness,
barber/salon, cinema and activities areas, in which some of these services would not be typically
found in a hotel. Therefore, it was determined to be appropriate to apply a hybrid rate for
determining the affordable housing requirement linkage fee. The proposed facility is 64,054 square
feet in size and would employ 73 service employees within a 24-hour period (3 work shifts).
Applying both the hotel (0.0075 affordable units per 1,000 gross sq. ft.) and personal service rates
(0.0225 affordable units per 1,000 gross sq. ft.) identified in Table 14.16.030 – 3, the Community
Development Director has determined an average non-residential affordable housing rate of 0.015
affordable units per 1,000 gross sq. ft., which translates to 0.96 low income units or an affordable
housing in-lieu fee of approximately $318,095.36 for the project, using the current affordable
housing in-lieu fee of $331,070.00 per unit. This was consistent with the rationale and formula used
recently for the only other assisted living facility processed since the adoption of this Ordinance in
2005 (Oakmont Senior Living at 3773 Redwood Hwy.).
The Commission grappled with this issue during their hearing and struggled with whether assisted
living uses should be subject to the residential or non-residential inclusionary housing requirement.
They also believed that need for affordable housing units that would be generated by this sort of
use should be greater than the 0.96 unit. During the Planning Commission hearing on the project,
the property owner voluntarily offered to increase the affordable housing in-lieu fee payment, from
$318,095.36 to $500,000. At the hearing, staff presented the Planning Commission the option to
continue their review of the project so that this offer, and the project’s proposed affordable housing,
could be studied further. Instead, using its independent review authority. the Planning Commission
approved the project and accepting the property owner’s voluntary offer to increase the affordable
housing in-lieu fee payment (Condition 20, ED17-090.
ATTACHMENT 1 -6
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council upholds the Planning Commission’s
conditional approval of the Use Permit (UP17-030) and the Environmental and Design Review Permit
(ED17-090), which allows the construction of a new 88-bed, assisted living facility with garage parking
and associated site improvements, including minor grading, drainage and landscaping, on two vacant
Downtown parcels located at 800 Mission Ave., based on the following findings:
Use Permit (UP17-030)
Findings
A.The proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance, and
the purposes of the Multifamily Residential-High Density (HR1) District in which the project site is
located in, given that:
1.As documented in the General Plan 2020 Consistency Table (Exhibit 4; 7/10/18 Planning
Commission Packet), the project will be consistent with all pertinent General Plan policies with
the exception of Housing Policy H-9 (Special Needs), which is intended to encourage providing
mix of housing options for San Rafael’s most vulnerable residents:
Housing Policy H-9 (Special Needs). Encourage a mix of housing unit types throughout San
Rafael, including very low- and low-income housing for families with children, single parents,
students, young families, lower income seniors, homeless and the disabled. Accessible units
shall be provided in multi-family developments, consistent with State and Federal law.
In 2006, the City Council approved a project on the site to allow construction of a 36-unit
multifamily residential condominium building on the site with six (6) BMR (Below Market Rate)
units (4 units at the low-income household level and 2 units at the moderate-income household
level). The project was never constructed, and the Planning entitlements have expired. The new
property owner of the site proposed a new project. The project now proposes to provide
residential housing for seniors, though at market-rate rather than low-income household levels.
Neighborhoods Policy NH-17 (Competing Concerns) states that, in reviewing and making
decisions on projects, competing economic, housing, environmental and design concerns must
be balanced. No one factor should dominate, though economic and housing development are
high priorities to the health of Downtown. Through multiple Housing Policies, such as H-13
(Senior Housing), the City supports the development of housing to help meet the needs of all
San Rafael residents, including seniors. The proposed project assists in the City’s goal of
providing options for older residents who wish to “age-in-place”.
Overall, while the project has the potential to conflict with one or more General Plan policies, it
would be consistent with most of the applicable San Rafael General Plan 2020 policies. The
project site is a choice housing site due to its close proximity to the Downtown and the project
proposes residential development, where residents, guests and staff would re-activate a portion
of Lincoln and Mission Avenues and help contribute to the City’s long-term goal of creating
‘Alive after 5’ activity in the Downtown and provide economic opportunities to Downtown
businesses, particularly restaurants The City supports the development of housing, at all levels,
to help meet the needs of all San Rafael residents. This includes our older population.
2.As documented in the Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table (Exhibit 5; 7/10/18 Planning
Commission Packet), the proposed project will be consistent with the objectives of the Zoning
Ordinance, which is to promote and protect the public health safety, peace, comfort and general
welfare, given that;
ATTACHMENT 1 -7
a.The project will implement and promote the goals and policies of the San Rafael General
Plan 2020, as identified in Finding A1 above;
b.The project will reduce or remove negative impacts caused by inappropriate location, use or
design of building and improvements, given that; 1) The project design includes aesthetic
elements to improve the pedestrian environment, including new street trees, landscaping
within the 10-15’ building setback and uncovered ground-floor patio terraces along both the
Lincoln and Mission Ave. frontages; 2) The project design also includes safety features to
improve the pedestrian environment, including a 85’-long dedicated fire lane pull-
out/deceleration turn pocket lane along Mission Ave. with directional controls allowing right
turns only in and out of the primary driveway to the project; 3) The Board is recommending
approval of the project subject to follow-up review of final details on landscape, exterior
lighting and outdoor terrace finishes; and 4) The proposed project changes have been
reviewed with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and
found; since the historic motor court was demolished in 2007, the proposed project is now
eligible for a category exemption to CEQA review (Class 32; In-Fill Development Projects)
with the mitigation measures from the original EIR requiring documentation of the prior
historic motor court on the project site as a condition to allow the CEQA exemption;
c.The project will ensure the adequate provision of light, air space, fire safety and privacy
between buildings, given that; 1) the proposed site development will be consistent with the
allowable Public/Quasi-Public (P/QP) District development standards; and 2) construction of
the project is conditioned to be designed and built in accordance with the most current
building, fire and seismic codes;
d.The project will provide for adequate, safe and effective off-street parking and loading
facilities, given that; 1) The project requests a Parking Modification to reduce the required
on-site parking for the project, from 42 to 40 parking spaces; 2) The project proposes
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programming into the operation of the assisted
living facility. Staffing projections include three (3) separate shifts (6 am- 2 pm; 2 pm – 10
pm; 10 pm – 6 am) which would are all off-peak trip hours; 3) The location of the project site
itself has TDM influences since it is located in close proximity to public transit options (less
than 1,000’ feet north of both the Downtown SMART station and Bettini transit center; 4)
The project supports their requested Parking Modification with a traffic analysis which
anticipates that 31 parking spaces are required for similar sized assisted living facilities
operated by Aegis Living; 5) On June 5, 2018, the Design Review Board (Board) reviewed
the proposed project design and unanimously recommended approval, including the
requested Parking Modification, conditioned on the project return to the Board for f inal
review of details on landscaping, exterior lighting and outdoor terrace finishes, prior to
building permit issuance; and 6) On July 10, 2018, the Planning Commission (Commission)
reviewed and conditionally approved the Use Permit (UP17-030) with the requested Parking
Modification and the Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED17-090), subject to the
following additional conditions: 1) Accept the property owner’s voluntary offer to increase
the affordable housing in-lieu fee payment, from $318,095.36 to $500,000; 2) Require the
applicant submit a Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDMP), as prepared by a
licensed traffic engineer, identifying strategies and recommendations for reducing
employee/staff vehicle trips and minimizing parking and traffic impacts; and 3) Reserve the
right to require additional traffic measures, such as pavement markings and signs, both on-
site and off-site, to improve vehicle circulation; and
ATTACHMENT 1 -8
e.The proposed project will promote a safe, effective traffic circulation syste m, and maintain
acceptable local circulation system operating condition, given that; 1) The City Engineer has
determined the proposed project would not adversely affect the LOS for the nearby
intersections, based on the eight (8) new AM and PM peak hour vehicle trips that would be
generated by the project, and conditioned on the payment of traffic mitigation fees to fund
the project’s fair share of local circulation improvement projects by the City; and 2) The
proposed project has been conditioned to require all “off-haul” of excavation during off-peak
traffic trip hours – between 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. – only;
f.The proposed project will provide for effective citizen participation in decision-making, given
that; the City has provided opportunities for public involvement in the review of the project
through the referral of the project to the appropriate neighborhood group (Lincoln-San
Rafael Hill Neighborhood Association), and the notice of both the Commission hearing and
the Board meeting and this City Council hearing in compliance with Chapter 29 of the
Zoning Ordinance (Public Notice). Notice of both the Board meeting and this hearing were
mailed to all property owners and occupants within a 300-foot radius of the site, and the
appropriate neighborhood groups, a minimum of 15 calendar days prior to the meeting or
hearing, and notice was posted on the project site at the northwest corner of the Lincoln and
Mission Avenue intersection. Prior to the Commission hearing on the project, 25 public
comments were received in support of the project and one (1) verbal comment which is
neither in support or opposition of the project but, rather, concerned the proposed on-site
parking (40 parking spaces) is inadequate, particularly for visiting family and friends of future
residents. After the Commission’s approval of the project, four (4) additional public
comments were received; two (2) comments in support; one (1) comment opposed to the
affordable housing in-lieu fee; and one (1) comment in support of the proposed use
(assisted living facility) though opposed to the proposed operator (Aegis)
g.The project has been reviewed by Community Development Department, other appropriate
City Departments and non-City agencies and conditions have been created to minimize
potential impacts to the public health, safety and welfare;
3.As documented in the Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table (Exhibit 5; 7/10/18 Planning
Commission Packet), the proposed project would be consistent with the purposes of the HR1
District, given that:
a)The project will help meet the City’s goal of providing a wide variety of housing opportunities
in terms of housing types, and neighborhoods with varying densities, lot sizes, and
development standards, given that; the project will provide housing options for our older
residents who wish to “age-in-place”.
b)The project will protect and enhance existing residential neighborhoods through retention of
existing land development patterns and retention of their varied design character, given that; 1)
The scale and mass of the proposed project would be similar to the project that is approved
for the site, which was previously determined to be compatible with the adjacent, four -story
residential condominium building immediately to the west of the project site, at 820 Mission
Ave. (The two blue-tiled dome towers are proposed to exceed the height allowance as
architectural features, which is permitted with an Environmental and Design Review Permit;
2)The proposed project is consistent with the height limits for this site; and 3) The project
proposes a Mission Revival-like architecture with predominant design features including
large arched windows, whitewashed stucco walls, red clay roof tiles, blue-tiled dome towers,
decorative heavy-timber rafter ‘tails’ under the eaves, and decorative wrought iron
ATTACHMENT 1 -9
balconies, railings, fencing and gates. This proposed new design is similar to that of the
Mission San Rafael Archangel, which is located approximately 1,000’ west of the project
site, though unique for the immediate neighborhood. The Board has reviewed the proposed
project design and unanimously recommended approval conditioned on the project return to
the Board for final review of details on landscaping, exterior lighting and outdoor terrace
finishes, prior to building permit issuance.
c)The project will provide opportunities for churches, day care facilities, residential care
facilities and other uses which are considered to be compatible and desirable land uses
within residential neighborhood ;
d)The project will provide outdoor recreational amenities for residents and guests, given that;
common outdoor areas are proposed on the ground-floor and on the roof deck for the
assisted living residents (The project also proposes private outdoor terrace deck area for
many of the assisted living residential rooms on the fourth floor). The project also proposes
a large common outdoor terrace on the second floor for the memory care residents. If these
were residential units with individual kitchens, 7,700 sf of private or common outdoor area
would be required (77 residential units x 100 sf outdoor area per unit). Since this is a
commercial project proposing 77 residential ‘suites’ with common food service, the 6,032 sf
of private or common outdoor area is voluntary; and
e)The project will ensure the provision of public services and facilities needed to
accommodate planned residential densities , given that; all service providers, including
PG&E, Marin Sanitary Service, Marin Municipal Water District, San Rafael Sanitation
District, Central Marin Sanitation Agency, and the City’s Traffic Engineer, have review the
project and indicated that adequate infrastructure capacity exists for the project.
B.The proposed use will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially
injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity, given that: 1) The project has been reviewed
by appropriate City departments, non-City agencies, the appropriate surrounding neighborhood
group (Lincoln-San Rafael Hill Neighborhood Association) and the Board; and 2) Conditions of
approval have been included to mitigate any potential negative impacts anticipated to be generated
by the proposed use and construction to the proposed use; 3) The project would not significantly
change the type of use (resdiential development) or the scale and mass of the approved deisgn on
the project site; and
C.The proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance as
documented in the Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table (Exhibit 5; 7/10/18 Planning Commission
Packet).
Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED17-090)
Findings
A.The project design is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance, and
the purposes of Chapter 14.25 of the Zoning Ordinance; in that:
1.As documented in the General Plan 2020 Consistency Table (Exhibit 4; 7/10/18 Planning
Commission Packet), the proposed project will implement and promote the goals and policies of
the San Rafael General Plan 2020, as identified in Finding A1 (Use Permit UP17-030) above;
ATTACHMENT 1 -10
2. As documented in the Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table (Exhibit 5; 7/10/18 Planning
Commission Packet), the proposed project will be consistent with the objectives of the Zoning
Ordinance, which is to promote and protect the public health safety, peace, comfort and general
welfare, as identified in Finding A2 (Use Permit UP17-030) above;
3. As documented in the Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table (Exhibit 5; 7/10/18 Planning
Commission Packet), the proposed project will be consistent with the purposes of
Environmental and Design Review Permits, given that; the project will maintain and improve the
quality of, and relationship between, development and the surrounding area to contribute to the
attractiveness of the City, as determined during the review of the project by the Board. On June
5, 2018, the Board reviewed the proposed project design and unanimously recommended
approval, conditioned on the project return to the Board for final review of details on
landscaping, exterior lighting and outdoor terrace finishes, prior to building permit issuance.
Staff subsequently formalized the Board’s request to review these final details as a condition
(Condition #15; ED17-090) of approval.
B. The project design is consistent with all applicable site, architecture and landscaping design criteria
and guidelines for the HR1 District in which the project site is located, given that;
1. The project design will be consistent with the maximum allowable density for the site, which is
29 units based on 29,885 sq. ft. of total lot area. The project proposes no density, since assisted
living facilities are not subject to density standards since they are not considered as units. The
project proposes an assisted living facility with memory care services which is comparable to a
hotel use. The proposed facility would provide rooms or suites without individual kitchens but,
rather, individual ‘wet bar’ amenities and offer ancillary services to the residents like communal
food service opportunities;
2. The project will be consistent with the minimum required yard setbacks (15’ front, 10’ street
side, 5’ interior side and rear) for the project site;
3. The project will be consistent with the maximum 36’ height allowed for the project site;
4. The project will be consistent with the maximum 60% lot coverage for the project site;
5. The project will be consistent with the minimum 50% landscaping requirement for the front and
street side yard setbacks for the project site;
6. The project will be consistent with the parking requirement, subject to the approval of the
requested Parking Modification, by reducing the required parking from 42 to 40 parking spaces;
7. The provisions of Marin Municipal Water District’s (MMWD) most recent water conservation and
new ‘graywater’ requirements apply to the project, where MMWD approval is required prior to
the issuance of any building or grading permit (see Condition 79; ED17-090);
8. The proposed project will be consistent with review criteria for Environmental and Design
Review Permits (Chapter 14.25 of the Zoning Ordinance), given that; on June 5, 2018, the
Board reviewed the proposed project design and unanimously recommended approval,
including the requested Parking Modification, conditioned on the project return to the Board for
final review of details on landscaping, exterior lighting and outdoor terrace finishes, prior to
building permit issuance (see Condition 15; ED17-090).
ATTACHMENT 1 -11
C.The project design minimizes adverse environmental impacts, given that;
1.The 2007 building permit resulted in the demolition of all structures and vegetation on the
project site. The project now proposes to remove five (5) exist street trees and replace with
three (3) new street trees. The proposed landscape design includes new trees shrubs, grasses
and vines, within the 10-15’ building setback. In their review of the project, the Board requested
further refinements to the proposed landscape design, including more landscaping generally
throughout the project site. Board reviewed the proposed project and unanimously
recommended approval, including the preliminary landscape design, conditioned on the project
return to the Board for final review of details on the landscaping, exterior lighting and outdoor
terrace finishes, prior to building permit issuance.
2.The project design includes storm water retention areas or ‘bioswales’ which will have the effect
of creating a ‘no net change’ in the rate of storm water drainage on the project site, as
determined by the drainage report submitted on the project and the review and recommendation
by the City Engineer;
3.The project site neither contains, nor is immediately contiguous to, recognizable wetlands,
creeks or similarly sensitive environmental features, and it has not been identified in the San
Rafael General Plan 2020 (Exhibit 38 – Threatened and Endangered Species) as a general
location were threatened and endangered species have been previously observed or maintain a
suitable habitat for their likely presence to be found.
4.In 2006, the City Council certified an EIR, adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations,
and conditionally approved an Environmental and Design Review Permit, Use Permit and
Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map to allow construction of a 36-unit multifamily residential
condominium building on the site, with landscaping and drainage improvements. The EIR was
required, essentially, in response to the prior motor court on the project site which was
determined to be historic. In 2007, a building permit was issued for the demolition of the historic
motor court at 1203 Lincoln Ave. and the single-family residence on the adjacent parcel, at 1211
Lincoln Ave. and all improvements on these parcels were subsequently demolished and
removed. While the proposed project is now eligible for a category exemption to CEQA review
(Class 32; In-Fill Development Projects), mitigation measures from the original EIR requiring
documentation of the prior historic motor court on the project site, is required to allow the CEQA
exemption (see Condition 19; ED17-090).
D.The project design, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the
public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity,
or to the general welfare of the City, as identified in Finding B2 (Use Permit UP17-030) above.
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Finding
The proposed project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA), pursuant to Sections 15305(a) (Class 5; Minor Alterations to Land Use Limitations) and 15332
(Class 32; In-Fill Development Project) of the CEQA Guidelines which exempts: 1) Minor lot line
adjustments on lots with an average slope of less than 20%; and 2) In-fill development meeting the
following concditions: (a) The project is consistent with the applicable General Plan land use
designation and all applicable General Plan policies and all applicable Zoning Ordinance standards and
regulations; b) The proposed development occurs within the San Rafael city limits on a project site of
no more than five acres subsantially surrounded by urban uses; c) The project site has no value as
habitat for endangered , rare or threatened species; d) Approval of the project would not result in any
ATTACHMENT 1 -12
signifcant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality or water quality; and e) The site can be adequately
served by all required utilities and public services.
The project will require the consolidation of two separate legal lots, with an average cross-slope of
approximately 10%, so that all of the proposed new construction is located within a single parcel.
Additionally, the project qualifies for Class 32 In-Fill exemption based on the following: a) The project is
consistent with the applicable General Plan policies and the Zoning Ordinance land use designation for
the project site and all applicable Zoning Ordiance standards and regulations, as identified in the
attached Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table (see Exhibit 5 - 7/10/18 Planning Commission Packet);
b) The project site is comprised of two adjacent vacant legal lots with a combined area of 29,885 sf
(0.69 acre) and is located in an urban area that is immediately surrounded by development (i.e.,
multifamily residential development immediately to the north and west, Mission Ave. to the south and
Lincoln Ave. to the east); c) The project site has no creeks, drainageways, seasonal freshwater
wetlands, tidal wetlands, or riparian areas that are valued resources as wildlife or plant habitat for
endangered, rare or threatened species, and it is not identified as a general location for threatened and
endangered species based on past observations or the presence of suitable habitat per the General
Plan 2020 (see Exhibit 38; Conservation Element); d) The additional traffic generated by the project has
been deemed insignificant by the City’s Traffic Engineer conditioned on the payment of the appropriate
traffic mitigation fee (8 total peak hour trips), any additional noise or impacts to air and water quality
created by the project will be temporary and limited to the period of construction period, the new
residential uses for the site would generate noise levels that are similar to the other multi -family
residential uses in the surrounding neighborhood, and e) All utlility agencies have indicated that they
have adequate capacity to provide services to the new development on the site.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council upholds the Planning Commission’s conditional
approval of the Use Permit (UP17-030) and the Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED17-090),
which allows the construction of a new 88-bed, assisted living facility with garage parking and
associated site improvements, including minor grading, drainage and landscaping, on two vacant
Downtown parcels located at 800 Mission Ave., subject to the following conditions of approval:
Use Permit (UP17-030)
Conditions of Approval
Community Development Department, Planning Division
1. This Use Permit approves an assisted living facility, with memory care services, to operate on the
project site with up to 77 residential ‘suites’ and 88-beds of capacity.
2. This Use Permit includes a “Parking Modification” reducing the number of required on-site parking
spaces, from 42 to 40 ‘standard’ dimensional garage parking spaces, which has been reviewed and
is supported by both the Community Development Director and the Public Works Director.
3. Prior to issuance of the building permit, the applicant shall submit a Transportation Demand
Management Plan (TDMP), prepared by a licensed traffic engineer, identifying strategies and
recommendations to reduce employee/staff trips and minimize parking and/or traffic impacts. The
TDMP shall be subject to review and approval of the Department of Public Works and Community
Development Department, who reserves the right to require modifications to the TDMP. The
applicant agrees to incorporate all recommendations outlined in the TDMP, including modifications
required by the City, during the occupancy of the site by the approved use.
4. This Use Permit shall run with the land and shall remain valid regardless of any change of
ownership of the project site, subject to these conditions, provided that a grading permit or building
ATTACHMENT 1 -13
permit is issued by the City and work commenced or a time extension request is submitted to the
City’s Community Development Department, Planning Division, within two (2) years of this
approval, or until September 4, 2020. Failure to obtain a grading permit or building permit or submit
a time extension request by the specified date will result in the expiration of this Use Permit.
Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED17-090)
Conditions of Approval
General and On-Going
Community Development Department, Planning Division
1.The building techniques, colors, materials, elevations and appearance of the project, as presented
to the Planning Commission at their July 10, 2018 hearing, labeled Aegis San Rafael; 800 Mission
Avenue; San Rafael, CA 94901, stamped “approved” and on file with the Community Development
Department, Planning Division, shall be the same as required for issuance of all building and
grading permits, subject to these conditions. Minor modifications or revisions to the project shall be
subject to review and approval of the Community Development Department, Planning Division.
Further modifications deemed not minor by the Community Development Director shall require
review and approval by the original decision-making body, the Planning Commission, and may
require review and recommendation by the City’s Design Review Board on design-related changes.
2.The approved colors for the project are on file with the Community Development Department,
Planning Division. Any future modification to the color palette shall be subject to review and
approval by the Planning Division and those modifications not deemed minor shall be referred to
the Design Review Board for review and recommendation prior to approval by the Planning
Division.
3.This Environmental and Design Review Permit approves development of an 88-bed, 77-resdential
‘suites’ assisted living facility, with memory care services, on the project site with 40 garage parking
spaces and miscellaneous site improvements, including new landscaping, grading and drainage.
4.This Environmental and Design Review Permit approves a ‘wet bar’ in each residential ‘suite’ rather
than full kitchens since the project proposes to include common dining areas with the other service
amenities for residents and guests.
5.All ‘off-haul’ of excavation and delivery/pick-up of construction equipment shall occur during off-
peak weekday hours, between 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday only.
6.All grading and construction activities shall comply with the City’s adopted noise limits at all times
All grading and construction activities shall occur Mondays – Fridays, 7 a.m. – 6 p.m. Low-noise
construction, occurring entirely within the interior of the building, may be permissible beyond the
allowable construction hours of operation with prior approval by the Planning Division and only after
the building is completely enclosed (walls, roof, doors and windows). If requested and approved,
Saturday work shall be limited to 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. Any work on Sundays and federally-recognized
holidays is strictly prohibited.
7.All new landscaping shall be irrigated with an automatic drip system and maintained in a healthy
and thriving condition, free of weeds and debris, at all times. Any dying or dead landscaping shall
be replaced in a timely fashion.
ATTACHMENT 1 -14
8.All public streets and sidewalks and on-site streets which are privately owned that are impacted by
the grading and construction operation for the project shall be kept clean and free of debris at all
times. The general contractor shall sweep the nearest street and sidewalk adjacent to the site on a
daily basis unless conditions require greater frequency of sweeping.
9.All submitted building permit plan sets shall include a plan sheet incorporating these conditions of
approval.
10.If archaeological or cultural resources are accidentally discovered during excavation/grading
activities, all work will stop within 100 feet of the resource and the qualified archaeologist will be
notified immediately. The qualified archaeologist will contact Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria
(FIGR) and the Planning Division and coordinate the appropriate evaluation of the find and
implement any additional treatment or protection, if required. No work shall occur in the vicinity until
approved by the qualified archaeologist, FIGR and Planning staff. Prehistoric resources that may be
identified include, but shall not be limited to, concentrations of stone tools and manufacturing debris
made of obsidian, basalt and other stone materials, milling equipment such as bedrock mortars,
portable mortars and pestles and locally darkened soils (midden) that may contain dietary remains
such as shell and bone, as well as human remains. Historic resources that may be identified
include, but are not limited to, small cemeteries or burial plots, structural foundations, cabin pads,
cans with soldered seams or tops, or bottles or fragments or clear and colored glass
11.If human remains are encountered (or suspended) during any project-related activity, all work will
halt within 100 feet of the project and the County Coroner will be contacted to evaluate the situation.
If the County Coroner determines that the human remains are of Native American origin, the County
Coroner shall notify FIGR within 24-hours of such identification who will work with Planning staff to
determine the proper treatment of the remains. No work shall occur in the vicinity without approval
from Planning staff.
12.This Environmental and Design Review Permit shall run with the land and shall remain valid
regardless of any change of ownership of the project site, subject to these conditions, provided that
a building or grading permit is issued and construction commenced or a time extension request is
submitted to the City’s Community Development Department, Planning Division, within two (2)
years of approval, or September 4, 2020. Failure to obtain a building permit or grading permit and
construction or grading activities commenced, or failure to obtain a time extension within the two -
year period will result in the expiration of this Environmental and Design Review Permit
13.This Environmental and Design Review Permit shall run concurrently with the Use Permit (UP17-
030) approval. If the Environmental and Design Review Permit expires, Use Permit approval shall
also expire and become invalid.
Prior to Issuance of Grading/Building Permits
Community Development Department, Planning Division
14.The project sponsor, or its successor, shall pay all outstanding balances of fees due the City in the
review, approval and/or issuance of Planning and/or Building Permits for entitlements on the project
site.
15.Details of the proposed site landscaping, the exterior lighting and outdoor terrace finishes, on both
the 2nd floor podium and the 4th floor roof level, shall require final review and approval by the Design
Review Board prior to building permit issuance.
ATTACHMENT 1 -15
16.Final landscape and irrigation plans for the project shall comply with the provisions of Marin
Municipal Water District’s (MMWD) most recent water conservation ordinance (District Code Title
13). Construction plans submitted for issuance of building/grading permit shall be pre-approved by
MMWD and stamped as approved by MMWD or include a letter from MMWD approving the final
landscape and irrigation plans. Modifications to the final landscape and irrigation plans, as required
by MMWD, shall be subject to review and approval of the Community Development Department,
Planning Division prior to building permit issuance
17.An acoustical analysis is required indicating the internal noise level of the residential rooms or
suites and common outdoor terrace areas are consistent with the applicable City’s noise standards.
18.A Construction Management Plan (CMP) shall be prepared and submitted to the Planning Division
for review and approval. The CMP shall include, but is not limited to, a projected schedule of work,
projected daily construction truck trips, proposed construction truck route, location of material
staging areas, location of construction trailers, location of construction worker parking, dust control
plan or program, air quality best management practices recommended by project’s air quality
analysis (see Illingworth & Rodkin, dated November 30, 2017), a statement that the project shall
conform to the City’s Noise Ordinance (Chapter 8.13 of the San Rafael Municipal Code), a
statement that no construction truck traffic shall encroach into any of the surrounding residential
neighborhood streets at any time, and a statement that the existing roadway conditions on both
Lincoln and Mission Avenues shall be memorialized on digital recording format prior to the start of
construction and that the project sponsor shall be required to repair any roadway damage created
by the additional construction truck traffic. In the event that the CMP is conflicting with any
conditions imposed by the grading permit for the project, the more restrictive language or conditions
shall prevail.
19.Per Condition #7 of City Council Resolution #12018, the project sponsor, or its successors, shall
document the prior buildings at 1203 Lincoln Avenue to Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS)
Level 3 standards, according to the Outline Format described in the Historic American Buildings
Survey Guidelines for Preparing Written Historical Descriptive Data, or equivalent action as
determined by a licensed historic architect or architectural historian. Photographic documentation
shall follow the Photographic Specifications – Historic American Building Survey, including 15 to 20
archival quality large-format photographs of the exterior and interior of the building and its
architectural elements. Construction techniques and architectural details shall be documented,
especially noting the measurements of structural members, hardware, and other features that tie
the architectural elements to a specific date. A copy of the documentation, with original photo
negatives and prints, shall be placed in a historical archive or history collection accessible to the
general public. Additionally, the developer shall fund an exhibit of the historical survey at the Marin
Historical Society, the Anne T. Kent California Room at the Marin County Library Civic Center
Branch. Five copies of the documentation with archival photographs shall be produced for
distribution to local and regional repositories. One copy shall be provided to the Northwest
Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System, Sonoma State
University, Rohnert Park, California.
20.The project shall comply with the City’s affordable housing requirement, using a hybrid rate that
includes both the hotel rate (0.0075 affordable units per 1,000 gross sq. ft.) and the personal
service rate (0.0225 affordable units per 1,000 gross sq. ft.) as adopted in Table 14.16.030 – 3 of
the San Rafael Zoning Ordinance. The Community Development Director has determined an
average nonresidential affordable housing rate of 0.015 affordable units per 1,000 gross sq. ft. shall
be required of the project, which translates to 0.96 low income units or an affordable housing in-lieu
fee of approximately $318,095.36 for the project, using the current affordable housing in-lieu fee of
ATTACHMENT 1 -16
$331,070.00 per unit. However, the applicant has voluntarily offered to increase the affordable
housing in-lieu fee to $500,000, which was accepted by the Planning Commission as a condition of
project approval and shall be required to be submitted prior to issuance of a building permit.
Department of Public Works
21. A grading permit is required for the project from the Department of Public Works Department (111
Morphew St.).
22. Final details, including directional controls (i.e., signage and striping for right turns in and out of the
garage) on the driveways, pull outs and turn pockets shall be reviewed by the Department of Public
Work prior to building permit issuance.
23. The project proposes over 5,000 sq. ft. of impervious surface and is a regulated project under
MCSTOPPP requirements. Provide a stormwater control plan, which includes a written narrative . A
stormwater facility maintenance agreement shall be required. More specific information is available
from MCSTOPPP, on the Marin County website. See tools and guidance, and post construction
requirements at http://marincounty.org/depts/pw/divisions/mcstoppp/development/new-and-
redevelopment-projects
24. While the preliminary design of the proposed stormwater control plan is acceptable, limited use of
pumping and piping through the interior building is recommended.
25. The proposed project results in 15 AM and 19 PM peak hour trips. After crediting the project for the
peak hour trips generated by the prior development on the site (13 AM and 13 PM peak hour trips
from 24 residential apartments and one single-family residence). The traffic mitigation fee for the
resulting increase of eight (8) peak hour trips is $33,968 (8 x $4,246) shall be paid prior to building
permit issuance.
26. An encroachment permit is required for any work within the public Right-of-Way (ROW) from the
Department of Public Works. Please note that Mission Ave. and a portion of Lincoln Ave., fourth of
Mission Ave., are currently moratorium streets.
27. A construction vehicle impact fee shall be required at the time of building permit issuance, which is
calculated at 1% of the valuation with the first $10,000 of valuation exmpt.
Community Development Department, Building Division
28. The proposed project contains several different occupancy types. The existing occupancy types
appear to be S-2 whereas the proposed adult day care is an I-2.1, and the senior housing on the
upper floors is R-2. Individual occupancies are categorized with different levels of hazard and
typically need to be separated from other occupancy types for safety reasons. These separations
are required to be a minimum 1- or 2-hour fire resistive construction. Under mixed-occupancy
conditions the project architect has available several design methodologies (accessory
occupancies, nonseparated occupancies, and separated occupancies) to address the mixed-
occupancy concerns.
This concern is raised during the Planning Division’s review because these fire separations
increase costs. During the Planning Division process, the project architect’s forethought will
hopefully prevent issues during the building permit process because a definitive answer will not be
available until the Building Permit application’s plan review process occurs.
ATTACHMENT 1 -17
29. School fees will be required for the project. Calculations are done by the San Rafael City Schools,
and those fees are paid directly to them and proof of payment shall be submitted to the B uilding
Division prior to issuance of the building permit.
30. The design and construction of all site alterations shall comply with the current editions of the
California Building Code, Plumbing Code, Electrical Code, California Mechanical Code, California
Fire Code, California Energy Code, Title 24 California Energy Efficiency Standards, California
Green Building Standards Code and City of San Rafael Ordinances and Amendments
31. A building permit is required for the proposed work. Applications shall be accompanied by four (4)
complete sets of construction drawings to include:
a) Architectural plans
b) Structural plans
c) Electrical plans
d) Plumbing plans
e) Mechanical plans
f) Site/civil plans (clearly identifying grade plan and height of the building)
g) Structural Calculations
h) Truss Calculations
i) Soils reports
j) CalGreen documentation
k) Title-24 energy documentation
32. The occupancy classification (in mixed occupancies-each portion of the building shall be individually
classified), construction type and square footage of each use within the building shall be specified
on the plans.
33. The building height shall comply with CBC Section 504 and Table 503. On the plan justify the
proposed building height.
34. Building areas are limited by CBC Table 503. On the plan justify the proposed building area. For
this mixed use, the maximum allowable area will be a “sums of ratios”. Please verify that your
building size and construction type are within allowable maximums.
35. The maximum area of unprotected and protected openings permitted in the exterior wall in any
story of a building shall not exceed the percentages specified in CBC Table 705.8 “Maximum Area
of Exterior Wall Openings Based on Fire Separation Distance and Degree of Opening Protection.”
In order to calculate the maximum area of exterior wall openings you must provide the building
setback distance from the property lines and then justify the percentage of proposed wall openings
and include whether the opening is unprotected or protected. The elevations appear to indicate
openings in the areas where rated walls are required.
36. Multiple exit pathways on several floors are thru “lounge” areas. In addition, a kitchen in located in
the exit pathway on the first floor. This is problematic, as these areas often have moveable
furniture, are often occupied with large numbers of tenants for group activities. Further, based on
the nature of the tenants, there are often wheelchairs and walkers strewn about which cause
additional obstruction to the path of egress. Please consider a redesign of the exit way.
37. Areas of refuge will be required at stairway vestibules. It appears that they may be adequately
sized, but ensure that code required clearances area met.
ATTACHMENT 1 -18
38.The elevator will require separation from the corridor/lobby except at the ground floor.
39.All sleeping rooms shall have an egressable window, and a related pathway to the public way.
Ensure that all gates, walkways, etc. around the building perimeter meet this requirement.
40.Due to ambient noise from the two arterial roadways that front on the property, sound attenuation
will likely be required for those units that face Mission and Lincoln Avenues. An acoustical analysis
will be required as part of the building permit submittal.
41.Requirements for the memory care unit are somewhat unique, and will require both approval from
the Building and Fire Prevention Divisions for such things as delayed egress, lack of access to
egressable windows/balconies, minimum staffing levels to provide assisted egress in the event of a
fire or other catastrophic event, and so forth.
42.The address for structures is determined by the Chief Building Official. The tentative address for the
proposed project is 800 Mission Avenue. This address will be legalized as we approach completion of
the project construction. A written request from the property owner should be sent to the Chief Building
Official. Each page of the plan’s title block and all permit application documents must show the
proposed building’s address identification information.
43.If proposed fencing/gates exceed 7' in height, a building permit is required.
44.A grading permit is required for any grading or site remediation, soils export, import and placement.
Provide a detailed soils report prepared by a qualified engineer to address these procedures. In
particular, the report should address the import and placement and compaction of soils at future
building pad locations and should be based on an assumed foundation design. This information
should be provided to Building Division and Department of Public Works for review and comments
prior to any such activities taking place.
45.Prior to building permit issuance for the construction of each building, geotechnical and civil pad
certifications are to be submitted. Property lines must be staked for inspection of foundations.
46.Property lines shown through proposed buildings must be eliminated by consolidation or buildings
must be relocated or redesigned to fall within property line boundaries. Parcels 011-184-09 & 011-
184-08 must be consolidated, and new map recorded prior to issuance of a building permit.
47.Based on the distance to the property line (and/or adjacent buildings on the same parcel), the
building elements shall have a fire resistive rating not less than that specified in CBC Table 601 and
exterior walls shall have a fire resistive rating not less than that specified in CBC Table 602.
48.Cornices, eaves overhangs, exterior balconies and similar projections extending beyond the floor
area shall conform to the requirements of CBC 705.2. Projections shall not extend beyond the
distance determined by the following two methods, whichever results in the lesser projection:
a.A point one-third the distance from the exterior face of the wall to the lot line where
protected openings or a combination of protected openings and unprotected openings are
required in the exterior wall.
b.A point one-half the distance from the exterior face of the wall to the lot line where all
openings in the exterior wall are permitted to be unprotected or the building is equipped
throughout with an automatic sprinkler system.
ATTACHMENT 1 -19
c.More than 12 inches into areas where openings are prohibited.
49.Walls separating sleeping rooms from each other and other occupancies continguious must be a
minimum of 1-hour construction.
50.All site signage as well as wall signs require a separate permit and application (excluding address
numbering).
51.Any monument sign(s) shall have address numbers posted prominently on the monument sign.
52.It appears that at least the lower level of parking in the parking garage will require mechanical
ventilation capable of exhausting a minimum of .75 cubic feet per minute per square foot of gross
floor area CMC Table 403.7.
53.In the parking garage, in areas where motor vehicles are stored, floor surfaces shall be of
noncombustible, nonabsorbent materials. Floors shall drain to an approved oil separator or trap
discharging to sewers in accordance with the Plumbing Code and SWIPP.
54.The parking garage ceiling height shall have a minimum vertical clearance of 8’ 2” where required
for accessible parking.
55.Minimum elevator car size shall meet CBC 11A and 11B for accessibility.
56.This project shall provide not less than one medical emergency service elevator. The medical
emergency service elevator shall accommodate the loading and transport of an ambulance gurney
or stretcher.
57.In the service areas, mechanical ventilation will be required capable of exhausting a minimum of 1.5
cubic feet per minute per square foot of gross floor area. Connecting offices, waiting rooms,
restrooms, and retail areas shall be supplied with conditioned air under positive pressure.
58.The proposed facility shall be designed to provide access to the physically disabled in accordance
with the requirements of Title-24, California Code of Regulations. For existing buildings and facilities
when alterations, structural repairs or additions are made, accessibility improvements for persons
with disabilities may be required. Improvements shall be made, but are not limited to, the following
accessible features:
a.Path of travel from public transportation point of arrival
b.Routes of travel between buildings
c.Accessible parking
d.Ramps
e.Primary entrances
f.Sanitary facilities (restrooms)
g.Drinking fountains & Public telephones (when provided)
h.Accessible features per specific occupancy requirements
59.The site development of items such as common sidewalks, parking areas, stairs, ramps, common
facilities, etc. are subject to compliance with the accessibility standards contained in Title -24,
California Code of Regulations. Pedestrian access provisions should provide a minimum 48" wide
unobstructed paved surface to and along all accessible routes. Items such as signs, meter
pedestals, light standards, trash receptacles, etc., shall not encroach on this 4' minimum width.
ATTACHMENT 1 -20
Also, note that sidewalk slopes and side slopes shall not exceed published minimums per California
Title 24, Part 2. The civil, grading and landscape plans shall address these requirements to the
extent possible.
60.Multifamily dwelling and apartment accessible parking spaces shall be provided at a minimum rate
of 2 percent (2%) of the covered multifamily dwelling units. At least one space of each type of
parking facility shall be made accessible even if the total number exceeds 2 percent (2%).
61.When parking is provided for multifamily dwellings and is not assigned to a resident or a group of
residents, at least 5 percent (5%) of the parking spaces shall be accessible and provide access to
grade-level entrances of multifamily dwellings and facilities (e.g. swimming pools, club houses,
recreation areas and laundry rooms) that serve the dwellings. Accessible parking spaces shall be
located on the shortest accessible route to an accessible building, or dwelling unit entrance.
62.Public accommodation disabled parking spaces must be provided according the following table and
must be uniformly distributed throughout the site:
Total Number of Parking
Spaces
Provided
Minimum Required Number of
H/C Spaces
1 to 25 1
26 to 50 2
51 to 75 3
76 to 100 4
101 to 150 5
151 to 200 6
201 to 300 7
301 to 400 8
401 to 500 9
501 to 1,000 Two percent of total
1,001 and over Twenty, plus one for each 100
or fraction thereof over 1,001
63.At least one disabled parking space must be van accessible; 9 feet wide parking space and 8 feet
wide off- load area, or 17’ wide overall. Additionally, one in every eight required handicap spaces
must be van accessible.
64.This project will need to meet CalGreen building standards for new construction and in addition, will
be subject to Tier 1 requirements.
San Rafael Sanitation District
65.The building permit plans shall include Civil/Utility drawings which shows the sewer lateral design in
compliance with the San Rafael Sanitation District Standard Specifications, including pipe
information (pipe type, pipe size, inverts and slope) and a backflow preventer near the building.
66.Please add the following note to the Utility Plans: Notify the San Rafael Sanitation District Inspector,
Rolando Calvo (415.485.3194 or Rolando.calvo@cityofsanrafel.org), 72 hours prior to start of
sanitary sewer construction.
ATTACHMENT 1 -21
San Rafael Fire Department, Fire Prevention Bureau
67. The design and construction of all site alterations shall comply with the current editions of the
California Fire Code and City of San Rafael Ordinances and Amendments.
68. Deferred submittals for the following fire protection systems shall be submitted to the Fire
Prevention Bureau for approval and permitting prior to installation of the systems:
a) Fire sprinkler plans (Deferred submittal to the Fire Prevention Bureau)
b) Fire standpipe system plans (Deferred submittal to the Fire Prevention Bureau)
c) Fire Alarm system plans (Deferred submittal to the Fire Prevention Bureau)
d) Fire Underground plan (Deferred submittal to the Fire Prevention Bureau)
e) Kitchen Hood Automatic Fire-Extinguishing System plans (Deferred submittal to the Fire
Prevention Bureau).
69. A Fire apparatus access plan shall be prepared for this project. The fire apparatus plans shall show
the location of the following:
a) Designated fire apparatus access roads.
b) Red curbs and no parking fire lane signs.
c) Onsite fire hydrants.
d) Fire Department Connection (FDC).
e) Double detector check valve.
f) Street address sign.
g) Recessed Knox Box
h) Fire Alarm annunciator panel.
i) NFPA 704 placards
j) Note the designated fire apparatus access roads and fire hydrant shall be installed and
approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau prior construction of the building.
70. A Know Box is required at the primary point of first response to the building. A recessed mounted
Knox Box #3275 Series is required for his project. The Knox Box shall be clearly visible upon
approach to the main entrance from the fire lane. Note that the Know Box must be installed
between 72-78” above finished grade. Please show the location of the Knox Box on the plans.
71. If the garages will be gate controlled, the project must provide a Knox key gate control. Please
show the location of the key gate control on the plans.
72. When a building is fully sprinklered all portions of the exterior building perimeter must be located
within 250-feet of an approved fire apparatus access road:
a) The minimum width of the fire apparatus access road is 20-feet.
b) The minimum inside turning radius for a fire apparatus access road is 28-feet.
c) The fire apparatus access road serving this building is more than 150-feet in length so
an approved turn-around is required.
73. As the building is over 30 feet in height, an aerial fire apparatus access roadway is required parallel
to one entire side of the building:
a) The Aerial apparatus access roadway shall be located within a minimum 15 feet and a
maximum of 30 feet from the building.
b) The minimum unobstructed width for an aerial fire apparatus access road is 26-feet..
ATTACHMENT 1 -22
c) Overhead utility and power lines shall not be located within the aerial fire apparatus
access roadway, or between the roadway and the building.
74. Fire lanes must be designated with curbs painted red and contrasting white lettering stating “No
Parking Fire Lane” and signs shall be posted in accordance CFC 503.3.
75. Hazardous Materials Placards shall be installed in accordance with NFPA 704.
76. Provide a Hazardous Materials Management Plan to be submitted to the Marin County Department
of Public Works, CUPA.
77. Ensure that elevators are gurney accessible.
78. Fire extinguishers are required as per CFC provisions.
79. Contact the Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD) to make arrangements for MMWD to provide
adequate water supply service for the required fire protection system.
During Construction
Marin Municipal Water District
80. District records indicate that the property’s current annual water entitlement is insufficient to meet
the water demand for the project and the purchase of additional water entitlement will be required.
Additional water entitlement will be available upon request and fulfillment of the following
requirements:
a) Pay the appropriate fees and charges.
b) Comply with all indoor and outdoor requirements of District Code Title 13 – Water Conservation.
Indoor plumbing fixtures shall meet specific efficiency requirements. Landscape, irrigation,
grading and fixture plans shall be submitted to the District for review and approval. Any
questions regarding District Code Title 13 – Water Conservation should be directed to the
District’s Water Conservation Department at (415) 945-1497. You may also find information on
the District’s water conservation requirements online at www.marinwater.org.
c) Comply with the backflow prevention requirements, if upon the Districts review backflow
protection is warranted, including installation, testing and maintenance. Questions regarding
backflow requirements should be directed to the Backflow Prevention Program Coordinator at
(415) 945-1558.
d) Use of recycled water is required, where available, for all approved uses, including irrigation and
the flushing of toilets and urinals. Questions regarding the use of recycled water should be
directed to (415) 945-1558.
e) Installation of gray water recycling systems is required when practicable.
Pacific Gas & Electric
81. Electric and gas service to the project site will be provided in accordance with the applicable
extension rules, which are available on PG&E’s website at
http://www.pge.com/myhome/customerservice/other/newconstruction or contact (800) PGE-5000. It
is highly recommended that PG&E be contacted as soon as possible so that there is adequate time
to engineer all required improvements and to schedule any site work.
82. The cost of relocating any existing PG&E facilities or conversion of existing overhead facilities to
underground shall be the sole responsibility of the applicant or property owner.
ATTACHMENT 1 -23
83.Prior to the start excavation or construction, the general contractor shall call Underground Service
Alert (USA) at (800) 227-2600 to have the location of any existing underground facilities marked in
the field.
Community Development Department, Planning Division
84.The project shall minimize the potential air quality impacts to adjacent residences during all grading
and construction activities by implementing best management practices (BMPs), as identified the air
quality analysis submitted with the project application (Illingworth & Rodkin, dated November 30,
2017, Page 3).
Prior to Occupancy
Community Development Department, Planning Division
85.The project sponsor, or its successor, shall submit a lighting plan with photometric study, showing
compliance with the City’s adopted lighting standards.
86.Final inspection of the project by the Community Development Department, Planning Division, is
required. The applicant shall contact the Planning Division to request a final inspection upon
completion of the project. The final inspection shall require a minimum of 48-hour advance notice.
87.All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed prior to occupancy.
88.The landscape architect for the project shall submit a letter to the Planning Division, confirming the
landscaping has been installed in compliance with the approved project plans and the irrigation is
fully functioning.
89.All ground- and rooftop-mounted mechanical equipment shall be fully screened from public view.
90.All trash enclosures shall be fully screened from public view.
After Occupancy
Community Development Department, Planning Division
91.Following the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, all new exterior lighting shall be subject to a
90-day lighting level review period by the City to ensure that all lighting sources provide safety for
the building occupants while not creating a glare or hazard on adjacent streets or be annoying to
adjacent residents. During this lighting review period, the City may require adjustments in the
direction or intensity of the lighting, if necessary. All exterior lighting shall include a master
photoelectric cell with an automatic timer system, where the intensity of illumination shall be turned
off during daylight.
92.Following the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the City reserves the right to review traffic
conditions, both on-site and off-site circulation patterns generated by this use and any conflicts that
arise with existing traffic patterns on city streets, and the applicant agrees to incorporate all
recommended improvements, including, but not limited to, pavement striping and signage, both on
and off site, as determined by the Department of Public Works/City Engineer.
I, LINDSAY LARA, 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 City Council of said City held on
Tuesday, the 4th day of September 2018, by the following vote, to wit:
ATTACHMENT 1 -24
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS: Bushey, Colin, Gamblin, McCullough & Mayor Phillips
COUNCILMEMBERS: None
COUNCILMEMBERS: None
______________________________
LINDSAY LARA, City Clerk