Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Resolution 12686 (Highlands of Marin Apartment Appeal)RESOLUTION NO. 12686 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL DENYING AN APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S ACTION AFFIRMING THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT (ED08-011) FOR EXTERIOR RENOVATION OF APARTMENT BUILDINGS, CARPORTS, A RECREATION BUILDING AND REPLACEMENT OF AN EXISTING TENNIS COURT WITH A NEW 2,785 SQ. FT. LEASING OFFICE BUILDING AT THE HIGHLANDS OF MARIN APARTMENT COMPLEX (HOM I AND II) LOCATED AT 1050 CRESTA WAY (APN: 155-251-20,21,24,25 AND 155-280-01 THROUGH 16 AND 18) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL RESOLVES as follows: WHEREAS, in 1975, the Planning Commission approved the development of the Crest Marin apartments, currently known as Highlands of Marin (HOM) II, which consists of a 104 -unit apartment complex located on 6.19 acres accessed by Cresta Drive. HOM II was developed in 1976; and WHEREAS, in 1989, the Planning Commission approved the development of the Highlands of Marin apartments, currently known as Highlands of Marin (HOM) I. The HOM I consists of a 220 -unit apartment complex located on two, non-contiguous parcels sited on an 8.4 -acre hilltop, accessed by Cresta Drive. HOM I was developed in 1990. The City approvals require that 33 units be rented at below market rates through year 2030; and WHEREAS, on December 14, 2006, an application for an Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED06-114) to allow exterior remodeling of the HOM I complex was submitted to the Community Development Department that was deemed complete for processing on February 3, 2007; and WHEREAS, on February 22, 2007, the Community Development Department staff reviewed and approved the proposed project subject to findings and conditions of approval. The approved renovations were not carried out because the owners had acquired HOM II and wanted to pursue renovation of both complexes using a common design theme; and WHEREAS, on February 26, 2008, an application for an Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED08-011) was submitted for both HOM I and II complexes to allow exterior renovation of apartment buildings, carports, a recreation building and replacement of an existing tennis court with a new 2,785 sq. ft. leasing office building. The application was deemed complete for processing on April 2, 2008; and WHEREAS, on April 22, 2008, the San Rafael Design Review Board reviewed the proposed project and recommended plan changes. On May 20, 2008, the San Rafael Design Review Board reviewed plan revisions for the project and recommended approval; and WHEREAS, on May 21, 2008, Zoning Administrator reviewed ED Permit (ED08- 011) and continued the matter to May 27, 2008 requiring the submittal of additional information regarding open space areas; and WHEREAS, on May 27, 2008, Zoning Administrator reviewed and approved the ED Permit (ED08-011) for both HOM I and II complexes. The approval incorporated conditions requiring, among others: a) the payment of relocation assistance to qualifying low-income residents displaced by the renovations; and b) execution of an agreement between the City and the property owner reaffirming the BMR Agreement executed for HOM I in 1990; and WHEREAS, on June 3, 2008, David Therien and Maurice Burckhardt, tenants of HOM I1 filed an appeal (AP08-004) of the Zoning Administrator approval of the ED Permit; and WHEREAS, from June 2008 to January 2009, City staff has worked with the property owner to resolve and respond to appeal issues, including: a) the preparation and submittal of a Construction Phasing and Logistics Plan (CPLP) and Resident Communication Plan (RCP) to provide tenants with knowledge of the construction schedule, areas involving residential unit vacation and construction phasing; and b) conforming the status of BMR units; and WHEREAS, on January 13, 2009, the San Rafael Planning Commission held a duly -noticed public hearing on the appeal, accepting all oral and written public testimony and the written report of the Community Development Department staff. Following closure of the public hearing and lengthy discussion, the Commission voted to deny the appeal and uphold approval of the ED Permit with amendments to conditions. The Commission directed staff to prepare a final resolution with the recommended condition amendments for presentation and action at the next regular hearing; and WHEREAS, on January 27, 2009, the Planning Commission reviewed and adopted Resolution No. 09-01 on a 6-1 vote (Commissioner Paul absent) to deny the appeal and uphold the Zoning Administrator approval of the project with added and amended conditions of approval; and WHEREAS, on February 3, 2009, David Therien, Eugene Dougherty and Denny McGinnis, representatives of Highlands of Marin Residents Association filed an appeal (AP08-004) of the Planning Commission action upholding of the Zoning Administrator approval of the ED Permit; and WHEREAS, on March 2, 2009, the San Rafael City Council held a duly -noticed public hearing on the proposed project, accepting all oral and written public testimony and the written report of the Community Development Department staff; and WHEREAS, on March 2, 2009, following closure of the public hearing and discussion, the City Council voted to continue the project to April 6, 2009 and directed the 2 property owner to: a) complete and implement the Resident Communication Plan assuming an April 6, 2009 baseline date for developing a construction phasing and unit vacation schedule; and b) meet with the appellants and other tenants with the goal to resolve the issues of the payment schedule for relocation assistance and security deposit refunds; and WHEREAS, on March 30, 2009, the property owner submitted a letter (March 27, 2009, on file with the City Clerk) outlining the follow-up tasks and steps that have been completed in response to the City Council directive. First, this letter summarizes that the Resident Communication Plan (RCP) has been implemented by mailing individual letters to all tenants in HOM I and HOM II informing these tenants of the construction schedule, the scheduled dates for notice of unit vacation, the projected rents to renovated units, and, where appropriate, the low-income household amounts for determining if relocation assistance is available. Second, the letter states that two community meetings were held to inform residents of the renovation plans and the construction/unit vacation schedule. Third, several meetings were held with the appellant with the goal of resolving some of the relocation issues and to consider additional relocation assistance measures. Lastly, the letter confirms that the RCP has been revised and expanded; and WHEREAS, upon review of the application, the City Council has confirmed that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to (a) Section 15301 (a) (2) of the CEQA Guidelines, which exempts interior or exterior alterations, and (b) Section 15303 (e) of CEQA Guidelines, which exempts new, small structures; 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, the City Council of the City of San Rafael hereby denies the appeal (AP08-004) and upholds the Planning Commission's action affirming the Zoning Administrator's conditional approval of an Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED08-011). The City Council finds that the points of the appeal (in italics) cannot be supported for the following reasons: 1. Discretionary renovations will displace over 300 San Rarael residents and children from their apartment homes. This issue of resident displacement has been addressed throughout this project review process. First, the City's ordinance mandates relocation assistance for qualifying low-income residents that are displaced as a result of property renovations. Second, the City encourages maintenance of, and improvements to private properties. Third, the property owner has maintained that they will try to accommodate as many existing tenants as possible provided they meet with the owner's credit and income requirements. However, the rent of upgraded apartments will likely rise and some of the tenants may not qualify for the same apartments they are currently occupying. The SRMC Section 14.16.279 (Relocation Assistance) requires payment of two month's rent to tenants of record displaced by a development project. Beyond the two-month rent assistance, the City has no 3 authority to address the dislocation issue. To impose or require relocation assistance beyond that required by the City ordinance would be over and above the City's regulatory authority. Further, to require relocation assistance for all residents could discourage or create a disincentive to pursue property maintenance and improvements. 2. Most displaced residents will not be able to re -qualify for a renovated unit due to the owner's planned luxury upgrades, rates and qualification requirements. As stated above, some of the residents may not qualify for rents of upgraded apartments. However, apart from the SRMC 14.16.279 required payment of a two- month rent to displaced tenants of record, that qualify as low-income, the City does not have the authority to regulate rents. Additionally, the City of San Rafael is the only jurisdiction in Marin County that has a requirement for relocation assistance. 3. Residents who are forced to leave the property will enter an already constricted rental market with a limited supply of affordable housing options and very few vacancies. Thus to secure equitable, local housing at their currently affordable rates will be extremely difficult. These residents will face disproportionately significant challenges in maintaining important social, emotional, community and educational ties, as well as the means for their economic survival in Marin especially tinder current and looming economic conditions. As stated under the response to appeal points l and 2 above, the City encourages the maintenance of properties. Such maintenance upgrades to the properties could inevitably results in rent increases. Under SRMC 14.16.279, the City regulates and enforces the payment of two months' rent to qualified low-income tenants of record. Under the current policies and codes, the City cannot regulate the social issues that result from displacement due to a development project. Further, the Planning Commission made an effort to respond to this concern by expanding the requirement of the Resident Communication Plan (condition #15.a.) to include a schedule of intended rental ranges for the renovated units; contact information at Legal Aid Marin and Marin Housing Assist Line for assistance regarding tenant rights; information regarding on-site, temporary relocation options for tenants; and a list of property addresses for apartment complexes in the general area of the site that may have available rental units. 4. Residents who are able to qualify for an upgraded unit, and choose to stay, will be afforded only one month,.free ren! for the inconvenience of being displaced, will have no guaranteed option for return to their own upgraded unit, and will have to absorb the cost of substantially increased rents according to the owner's market - rate projections. Staff finds this issue has been generally addressed in the responses to appeal points 1 thru 3, above. Further, the rents for apartments in the older complex HOM II (Crest Marin) are currently lower because of age of the complex (30 years) which necessitate the much needed improvements and renovations of these apartments. The rents for all the renovated apartments are generally expected to increase in fl keeping with the competition. The City has no authority to regulate the free market forces of supply and demand. 5. The City's Relocation Assistance Ordinance (SRMC Section 14.16.279) provides a significant and appreciated benefit to residents who are of low-income and V1,ho qualify. However, our research shows that current relocation costs,far exceed the amount of this assistance. Also, a significant number of residents will neither qualify for the assistance nor an upgraded unit according to the owner's expected qualification requirements. As stated in the responses to appeal points paragraphs I thru 4 above, the City's authority in this matter is limited to the enforcement of the current relocation assistance provisions of SRMC Section 14.16.279. 6. There remain, in out- estimation, certain issues not n,holly addressed or conditioned by the Planning Commission's Resolution of January 27Ih, 2009. These include, but are not limited to the addition of a third leasing office building and its severe safety implications for vehicular and pedestrian traffic, as well as the olvmer's failure to respond adequately to the City's request.for a comprehensive relocation plan. Until last year, these two complexes were separately owned and operated. They had their own, geographically separated leasing offices. Now that the complexes are owned by one owner, it makes business sense for the new owner to consolidate the leasing operations into one new office in a central location. Further, it is very logical from a site planning standpoint. However, the project does not add new units and therefore, does not add additional traffic. As part of the ED Permit process, staff consulted and worked with the City's Traffic Engineer regarding the siting of this leasing office and traffic safety issues of this project. The Traffic Engineer has determined that there are no traffic safety issues associated with the two complexes as currently designed or with the new leasing office. Additionally, the Traffic Engineer has concluded that current traffic volumes are low and there will be no additional traffic volume; existing sight distances are adequate; traffic on this property has not been a problem; and the proposed roundabout, although preliminary and not part of this approval, would improve site access and circulation. 7. The project will result in the loss of no less than eleven (11) designated affordable (loiv-income BNIR) housing units from the City's current compliance ivith the San Rafael Housing Element. The older apartment complex, HOM II does not contain any below market rate (BMR) units. The City's 1989 approval of HOM I required that 15% (33) of the units be reserved for BMR rental (18 for low income and 15 for moderate income) for 30 years. The BMR agreement for the 33 units runs to 2030. HOM I was financed through California Tax Credits. The bonds were issued in 1989 by Marin Housing Authority. The bonds were refunded in 2000 with the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Finance Authority and a Regulatory Agreement placed on all 220 units in HOM I. The Regulatory WE Agreement required 20% of the total units (44 units) be rented to residents at 50% of median income. The owner plans to pay off the bonds and remove the income restrictions. The repayment of the ABAG bonds would eliminate the 11 BMR (44- 33mm-, 11) units that had resulted from the ABAG agreement. If the bonds are repaid, the City approved BMR agreement would still be in effect for 33 apartment units through 2030. Therefore, the elimination of the 11 BMR is not connected to the renovation project or to the City's discretion on this ED Permit. The renovation project neither requires the repayment of the ABAG bonds, nor is this a vehicle which can be used to repay the bonds. The ABAG bonds can be repaid independently of the project. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of San Rafael upholds the Planning Commission action to deny the appeal and affirm the Zoning Administrator approval of Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED08-011) based on the following findings: FINDINGS 1. The project has been designed consistent with the following General Plan Policies: LU - 12 (Building Heights), LU -23 (Land Use Map and Categories), NH -2 (New Development in Residential Neighborhoods), NH -8 (Parking), CD-ld (Landscape Improvement), CD -2 (Neighborhood Identity), CD -13 (Single -Family Residential Design Guidelines) because: a. The project meets and does not exceed the maximum height requirement of its General Plan Land Use designation of High Density Residential (LU 12); b. The project is consistent with its General Plan Land Use designation of High Density Residential (LU -23). The project will not change the existing residential density, which is in compliance with the maximum allowable Gross Density of 15- 32 units per acre (LU -23); c. The project preserves and enhances the residential character of the neighborhood and maintaining neighborhood compatibility (NH -2, CD -2 and CD -13) by: 1) Maintaining the existing building mass and height and creating continuity in the exterior design of the two complexes by introducing common materials and colors; 2) Integrating the proposed leasing office addition into the common design of the complex; and 3) Incorporating landscape improvements that enhance the project design, provide screening and are suitable for the site. 2. The new le asing office building is consistent with the MR2.5 Zoning District in that: a. The leasing office building is an allowed use consistent with Section 14.04.020 Land use regulations (R, DR, MR, HR, PD) which states, "Accessory structures and uses customarily incidental to a permitted use and contained on the same site" are permitted in all of these residential districts. The proposed leasing office is z customarily incidental to the multifamily residential use and would be located within the complex; b. The proposed leasing office building complies with the development standards regarding front, side and rear setbacks, height, lot coverage and parking under the MR2.5 zoning district; and c. Per Table 14.04.040 of the Zoning Ordinance, a minimum useable outdoor area of 200 sq. ft. (common and/or private) is required per dwelling unit. The two apartment complexes contain 324 dwelling units, which require a total useable outdoor area of 64,800 sq. ft. With the replacement of the existing tennis court, the project would provide an outdoor area of 285 sq. ft. common and/or private open space (total area of 92,388 sq. ft.), which exceeds the minimum requirement of the Code. 3. The project has been designed consistent with the general objective to promote design quality in all development by proposing new exterior materials with new color palette that is earth tone in nature and blends with the natural hillside setting of the site, which would be an improvement over the stucco material and plain colors that currently exist. 4. The proposed project has been designed consistent with the varied designs and heights of the existing neighborhood residences and is therefore, consistent with the specific purposes of Residential (R) districts to protect and enhance the existing residential neighborhood pursuant to Section 14.04.010 of the Zoning Ordinance. 5. The proposed exterior renovation and the new leasing office are consistent with Chapter 25 Design Review Criteria in that: a. The project is consistent with Section 14.25.030 that requires a shadow diagram if deemed necessary to evaluate potential shading of adjacent properties. The proposed new building is located quite a distance from existing, off-site development and would not shade any adjacent properties. Therefore, a shadow diagram would not serve any purpose; b. The project design, including its materials and colors, is consistent with the 2-3 story height of the existing buildings in the apartment complex; c. The proposed improvements have been designed by a registered architect with experience in designing similar projects in the Bay Area and these improvements have been reviewed and favorably recommended by the Design Review Board; d. The proposed project is consistent with SRMC Section 14.25.050.E, which requires: site design to have a harmonious relationship between structures within the development and between structures and the site; preservation of major views of the San Pablo Bay, wetlands, bay frontage, the Canal, Mt. Tamalpais and the hills; respecting site features and recognizing site constraints by minimizing grading, erosion and removal of natural vegetation; providing good vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian circulation and access, onsite and in relation to the surrounding area; providing energy-efficient design; providing special attention to proper site surface drainage; and requiring utility connections to be installed underground, in that: 7 1) The new leasing office building is harmonious with the existing buildings in terms of building height, materials and colors; 2) The proposed leasing office building would be marginally visible from other properties and public right of ways and its visual impact would be minimal. The project would not block major views of the San Pablo Bay, wetlands, bay frontage, the Canal, Mt. Tamalpais and the hills. Additionally, the property would be improved with landscaping; 3) The proposed project minimizes grading, erosion and removal of natural vegetation because the building site is an existing tennis court which is fairly level and does not contain any vegetation; 4) The proposed leasing office building is conveniently located with respect to both of the existing complexes and would not obstruct vehicle circulation, would provide parking for employees and visitors and would be easily accessible for both potential and existing tenants; 5) The existing stormwater drainage will continue to flow into open space which will filter urban runoff, and 6) Utilities are available for the proposed leasing office building and no new services are required for the development. e. The project is consistent with SRMC Section 14.25.050.F. of the Zoning Ordinance which requires project architecture to be harmoniously integrated in relation to the architecture in the vicinity in terms of colors and materials, scale and building design, in that: 1) The new leasing office building elevations provide appropriate massing. The front elevation, which is the most visible elevation incorporates a portico creating a visible interest. Consistent with the theme of the proposed exterior renovation of the apartment buildings, the walls contain stucco finish and cementitious lap siding and have dark earth tone colors; 2) The proposed new color palette would be earth tone in nature and would blend with the natural hillside setting of the site. The proposed white vinyl windows and new metal vents are appropriate given the small size of these features and would not be stark design elements that would be visible from long distance views of the site; and 3) The portico at the main entrance to the leasing office building provides a sense of entry to the building. 6. The design of the exterior renovations, minimizes potential adverse environmental impacts in that: a. The grading is minimal as proposed; b. The proposed renovations would not result in significant removal of existing vegetation or significant trees; and c. No additional residential units are proposed that would result in increased traffic or air pollutants and would not increase demand for utilities and services. 7. The design of the exterior renovations and the new leasing office building as conditioned below, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or Ey: materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity of the project site, or to the general welfare of the City of San Rafael in that: a. The proposed project has been reviewed by appropriate City departments. Conditions of approval recommended by other departments have been applied to minimize potential adverse visual, design, and safety impacts to the project site and adjacent properties; and b. The proposed project does not indicate a use that is prohibited in MR2.5 Zoning District, but is permitted by right under Section 14.04.020 of the San Rafael Municipal Code. 8. As conditioned, the project is consistent with Zoning Ordinance Section 14.16.279 (Relocation Assistance), in that the project applicant is being required to provide: a. Notice to all tenants that are vacated as a result of their unit renovation; b. Assistance to qualifying low-income families; and c. Proof of payment to eligible low-income families. 9. Pursuant to Section 15301 (a) (2) of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), or exterior alternations are exempt from the requirements of CEQA. Furthermore, pursuant to Section 15303 (e) of CEQA, small structures are exempt from the requirements of CEQA. Since the project is for limited exterior renovation improvements and will add a 2,785 sq. ft. leasing office building accessory to the apartment complex, the proposed project qualifies for a categorical exemption under Section 15301 and 15303 of CEQA. BE IT FURTIIER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of San Rafael upholds the Planning Commission's approval of the Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED08-011) subject to the following conditions, as amended: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL General and ongoing Plannina Division 1. The building techniques, materials, colors, elevations, and appearance of the project, as presented for approval on plans titled Highland of Marin I, Highlands of Marin 11 and Highlands of Marin New Leasing Office, San Rafael, CA; prepared by KTGY Group, Inc. and stamped approved on May 21, 2008, shall be the same as required for issuance of a Building Permit (except those modified by these conditions of approval). Any modifications or revisions to the project shall be subject to review and approval of the Community Development Department, Planning Division. Modifications deemed not minor by the Community Development Director shall require review and approval by the original decision- making body, the Zoning Administrator and the Design Review Board, if necessary. As shown on the preliminary plans, it is the intent of the applicant to modify the design and layout of the Cresta Drive terminus to a `roundabout' configuration. The modification of this road terminus will require an amendment to E this Environmental and Design Review Permit, which can be approved by the Community Development Director. 2. This Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED08-011) is valid for two (2) years from the date of final approval by the City of San Rafael and shall become null and void unless a Building Permit is issued or a time extension is granted. Once the conditions of approval have been implemented, this approval shall run with the land and shall continue to be valid whether or not there is a change in property ownership. Continued compliance with all conditions of approval shall be required for the duration of the use. 3. All landscaping shall be maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, free of weeds and debris. Any dying or dead landscaping shall be replaced in a timely fashion. d. All site improvements, including but not limited to the site lighting, hardscape, landscape islands and paving striping shall be maintained in good, undamaged condition at all times. Any damaged improvements shall be replaced in a timely manner. 5. The site shall be kept free of litter and garbage. Any trash, junk or damaged materials that are accumulated on the site shall be removed and disposed of in a timely manner. 6. Approved colors are as shown on the approved color and material board on file with the Community Development Department, Planning Division. Generally, the approved color palette consists of a mixture of white and shades of beige and brown colors. Any future modification to colors shall be subject to review and approval of the Planning Division and major modifications shall be referred to the Design Review Board. 7. No part of the existing landscape including any trees shall be removed, unless their removal has been reviewed and approved by Planning Division, or are authorized by the Vegetation Management Plan (VMP) approved by the Fire Department. 8. Contractor Contact Information Posting: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project site shall be posted with the name and contact number of the lead contractor in a location visible from the public street. Please check with the Planning Division regarding such a sign. 9. Construction Phasing, Lop-istics and Hours of Operation: Construction hours shall be limited as specified by Municipal Code Section 8.13.050.A which are 7 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday and Saturday from 9:OOa.m to 6:OOp.m. Construction shall not be permitted on Sundays or City -observed holidays. Construction activities shall include delivery of materials, arrival of construction workers, start up of construction equipment engines, playing of radios and other noises caused by 10 equipment and/or construction workers arriving at or on the site. This permit approves and requires compliance with the phasing shown in the Highlands of Marin Construction Phasing and Loiaistics Plan prepared by Peak West Development, LLC (dated November 28, 2008), which is on file with the Community Development Department. This phasing of construction is described in the plan and is approved as follows: a. Phase I Common Area Facilities b. Phase II Highlands of Marin I Exterior Renovations c. Phase III — Highlands of Marin I Interior Renovations d. Phase IV — Highlands of Marin II (formerly Crest Marin) Exterior and Interior Renovations It is understood that the dates listed in the Highlands of Marin Construction Phasing and Logistics Plan are subject to change based on weather, labor and materials availability, timely issuance of building permits, and market conditions. 10. On -Site Lightinp-: On-site lighting shall be shielded away from adjacent properties and directed on site. The design and type of lighting fixtures and lighting intensity of any proposed exterior lighting for the project shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director prior to installation of the lighting for compliance with all applicable Conditions of Approval, ordinances, laws and regulations. Lighting fixtures shall be of a decorative design to be compatible with the residential development and shall incorporate energy saving features. 11. Archaeological Resources: In the event that archaeological resources, such as concentrations of artifacts or culturally modified soil deposits including trash pits older than fifty years of age, are discovered at any time during grading, scraping, or excavation within the property, all work shall be halted in the vicinity of the find, the Planning Division shall be notified, and a qualified archaeologist shall be contacted immediately to make an evaluation. If warranted by the concentration of artifacts or soils deposits, an archaeologist shall monitor further work in the discovery area. If human remains are encountered during grading and construction, all work shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the discovered remains and the County Coroner and a qualified archaeologist shall be notified immediately so that an evaluation can be performed. The Coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission, if the remains are deemed to be Native American and prehistoric, so the "most likely descendant" can be designated. Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit Planninp- Division 12. Plans submitted for a Building Permit shall include a plan sheet, which incorporates these conditions of approval. 13. To ensure adequate circulation, parking, and access for emergency vehicles in the neighborhood, the applicant shall submit a construction management plan to the Planning Division for approval prior to Building Permit issuance. The plan shall identify that all activities, including but not limited to loading/unloading, storage, employee parking, related to the construction shall be located onsite. The plan shall also specify the methods and locations of employee parking, material drop-off, storage of materials, storage of debris and method of its disposal, size limits on delivery vehicles, construction days and hours, and appropriate safety personnel. 14. All mechanical equipment (i.e., air conditioning units, meters and transformers) and appurtenances not entirely enclosed within the structure (on side of building or roof) shall be screened from public view. The method used to accomplish the screening shall be indicated on the building plans and approved by the Planning Division. 15. The property owner shall comply with the provisions of SRMC Section 14.16.279 (Relocation Assistance), which requires that relocation assistance be provided for displaced apartment tenants that qualify as low-income. Prior to issuance of building permits for interior renovation of apartment units where existing tenants are displaced or required to vacate, the following tasks and measures shall be implemented: a. The property owner shall implement a Resident Communication Plan (RCP). A draft RCP has been prepared, which has been updated/revised by the property owner (March 27, 2009) and is on file with the Community Development Department. The revised RCP includes: 1) a schedule of the projected rent ranges for renovated apartment units; 2) information regarding on-site, temporary relocation options for tenants; 3) the projected construction schedule and expected dates for the vacation of units (assuming a baseline date of April 6, 2009); 4) contact information at Legal Aid of Marin and Marin Housing Assist Line; and 5) a list of property addresses for apartment complexes in the general area of the site that may have available rental units. Prior to the issuance of the first Building Permit for any renovation that requires the vacation of residents, the RCP shall be finalized and be submitted to the Community Development Department and shall include all finalized dates for construction and unit vacation and the projected rent ranges of renovated units. Implementation of this plan requires updating apartment residents on a regular basis regarding the timing of the project, including a building -by -building construction timeline so that tenants are aware of project impacts to their apartment and timing for vacation of units. 12 b. An escrow account shall be established with a deposit amount of $100,000. This escrow account shall be maintained and managed solely by the applicant/property owner. On the fifth day of each month following the establishment of the escrow account, the property owner shall submit a monthly report of activity on the account including, but not limited to the withdrawals for payment of relocation assistance and the remaining account balance as of the date of the monthly report. This escrow account must be kept active until the final relocation assistance payment in connection with the project is paid, after which the account may be closed and the principal returned to the applicant. Additional deposits in the escrow account may be necessary depending upon the number of displaced tenants that qualify for relocation assistance consistent with the City code provisions. At no time shall the account balance fall below $20,000. In compliance with the phasing shown in the Hiiahlands of Marin Construction Phasing and Logistics Plan prepared by Peak West Development, LLC (dated November 28, 2008), the following tasks and measures shall be implemented as each building is vacated and prepared for renovation: 1) The property owner shall provide to each tenant of record in the apartments to be vacated, a notice via certified mail, of the need to vacate. This notice shall be received no later than 60 days prior to the date the tenants are required to vacate. The notice shall include the statement required by SRMC Section 14.16.279.C. and shall state the date on which the tenant must vacate the apartment and a description of the relocation assistance available to low-income tenants. The description shall include the income standards for qualifying for relocation assistance and shall include a printed income certification form. The printed income certification form shall include a statement that the representation of income is being made under penalty of perjury and that any false statement may be punishable as a felony and thereby subject an individual to criminal and civil penalties. The location for delivery of the income certification and the date and time by which it must be delivered to the property owner shall also be set forth in the notice. 2) Proof of the vacation notice mailing and list of tenants of record receiving the notice shall be submitted to the City at the same time the notices are mailed. 3) Tenants of record who meet the income standards shall complete the income certification required by SRMC Section 14.16.279. The tenant shall deliver the certification to the property owner no later than close of business at the property owners' regular place of business, by the date specified in the notice, which date shall be no less than 17 days after the mailing date of the notice. Copies of all certificates from tenants of record confirming income status shall be submitted to the City. 4) The property owner shall prepare a list of tenants of record who have submitted valid certificates (including those certificates from all Section 8 tenants) and provide the list to the Community Development 13 Department within fifteen (15) business days after such certificates are received by the property owner. 5) No later than 30 days prior to the scheduled vacancy, the property owner shall pay over to each qualified tenant of record who has submitted a timely certificate of income, the relocation assistance provided in SRMC Section 14.16.279, less any amount due to the property owner from the tenant of record. Copies of the relocation assistance checks paid to qualifying tenants shall be submitted to the City. c. The property owner shall be responsible for paying the cost of City staff time required to review and monitor the RCP and relocation assistance payments. City staff time shall be billed on an hourly basis. Violation of this condition by the applicant/property owner shall be cause to revoke building permits for the project and/or require that construction work be ceased. 16. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for conversion of the HOM II leasing office into an area for resident mailboxes, the applicant shall submit a letter from the US Postal Service either confirming the continuation of the current mail delivery system (individual boxes at each building) or the requirement for a new, centralized system of mail delivery. Building Division 17. The design and construction of all site alterations shall comply with the 2007 California Building Code, 2007 Plumbing Code, 2007 Electrical Code, 2007 California Mechanical Code, 2007 California Fire Code, and 2005 Title 24 California Energy Efficiency Standards. 18. A building permit is required for the proposed work. Applications shall be accompanied by three (3) complete sets of construction drawings to include: (larger projects require 4 sets of construction drawings) a) Architectural plans b) Structural plans c) Electrical plans d) Plumbing plans e) Mechanical plans f) Fire sprinkler plans g) Site/civil plans (clearly identifying grade plan and height of the building) h) Structural Calculations i) Truss Calculations j) Soils reports k) Title -24 energy documentation 14 19. The occupancy classification, construction type and square footage of the building shall be specified on the plans in addition to justification calculations for the allowable area of the building. Site/civil plans shall be prepared by a California licensed surveyor or engineer clearly showing topography, identifying grade plan and height of the building. 20. For those buildings where the scope of work involves interior remodel work, it is likely that the these buildings meet the definition for "substantial remodel," as defined in Municipal Code Section 4.08.120, Amendments to the Fire Code. Therefore, installation of fire sprinklers may be required throughout the building. A determination as to whether fire sprinklers will be required will occur during the building permit review process. A separate deferred application shall be submitted to the Building Division by a C-16 contractor. 21. Based on City records and completion of a site inspection, some of the existing buildings are equipped with an existing fire sprinkler system installed in accordance to NFPA 13 standard. If any of the proposed construction work impacts the existing sprinkler system, a separate deferred application shall be submitted to the Building Division by a C-16 contractor. 22. Address numbers shall be installed for each building and shall be located in a position that is plainly visible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers must be Arabic numerals or alphabetical letters, be minimum 4" in height with a minimum stroke width of .5 inch, contrasting in color to their background, and either internally or externally illuminated.24. Knox box keyed entry system is required at designated access doors. 23. If proposed fencing exceeds 6' in height, a building permit is required. 24. Any demolition of existing structures will require a permit. Submittal shall include three (3) copies of the site plan, asbestos certification and PG&E disconnect notices. Also, application must be made to the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) prior to obtaining the permit and beginning work. Please contact BAAQMD for requirements. 25. School fees will be required for any new building area constructed in the project. School fees are not required for existing buildings or buildings being renovated. School fees for commercial space are computed at $0.33 per square foot of new building area. Calculations are done by the San Rafael City Schools, and those fees are paid directly to them prior to issuance of the building permit. 26. All private, on-site improvements such as retaining walls, street light standards, and private sewer system will require plan review and permits from the Building Division. N 27. In the event the final improvements include site grading or site remediation, soils export, import and placement, a detailed soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer to address these procedures. The soils report shall 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 shall be provided to Building Division and Department of Public Works for review and comments prior to any such activities taking place. A grading permit may be required for this work. 28. Geotechnical and civil pad certifications shall be submitted, where required by the Building Division. 29. Where ventilation is required, the minimum, open area to the outdoors shall be 4 percent of the floor area that is being ventilated (CBC 1203.4.1). 30. The minimum net glazed area required for natural light shall be more than 8 percent of the floor area of the room that it serves (CBC 1205.2). 31. All site signage (including wall signs) shall require a separate permit and application (excluding address numbering). Monument sign(s) located at the driveway entrance(s) shall have address numbers posted prominently on the monument sign 32. The new leasing office building shall be assigned a new building address by the Department of Public Works. 33. The new leasing office shall be designed to provide access to the physically disabled in accordance with the requirements of Title -24, California Code of Regulations (e.g., accessible parking stalls, path of travel, primary entrance, interior travel path and restrooms). 34. The project shall comply with the ADA requirements of Title -24, California Code of Regulations, as determined by the building Division. 35. Pedestrian access provisions shall 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 within this 4' minimum width. Sidewalk slopes and side slopes shall not exceed published minimums per California Title 24, Part 2. 36. The site development of such items 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. The civil, grading and landscape plans shall address these requirements to the extent possible. 1V 37. 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 Minimum Required Number of WC Provided Spaces 1 to 25 1 38. A minimum of one handicapped (ADA) parking space shall be designed to be van accessible (9 feet wide parking space and 8 foot wide off- load area). A minimum of one van accessible parking space shall be provided for every eight, required handicap spaces must be van accessible. 39. Fire lanes shall be maintained as originally designed the following italicized notation outlines those original requirements; painted red with contrasting mhite lettering stating "No Parking Fire Lane " A sign shall be posted in accordance with City of San Rafael standard 4204. 40. This property is located in an Urban Wildland Interface (UWI) area. A Vegetation Management Plan (VMP) has been approved by the Fire Department (June 3, 2008) and is on file with the Community Development Department. The VTM shall be implemented as approved. Public Works Detiartment 41. Site drainage shall not be diverted or concentrated on adjacent properties. This provision shall not apply to storm drainage lines and outlet dissipaters that are to be diverted to and located on the contiguous lands owned by the County of Marin, which are permitted by agreement between the property owner and the County. A copy of the signed agreement shall be submitted to the City prior to the issuance of the building permit that includes these drainage lines and outlet dissipaters. 42. All new roof drains shall be designed to be directed to landscape areas prior to entering an established swale or site drainage system. 43. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) incorporating Best Management Practices (BMP) shall be included in the building permit plan submittal. Traffic Division 44. New parking spaces must meet city minimum standards for back-up distance. Las Gallinas Vallev Sanitary District (LGVSD) 45. The proposed leasing office building shall apply for and receive an allocation of sewer capacity from the LGVSD prior to commencement of sewer service. 17 46. The proposed project may be subject to the construction of on-site or off-site sanitary sewer improvements. This requirement shall be confirmed by the LGVSD at the time of project construction, and shall be completed to the satisfaction of the District. Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD) 47. A High Pressure Water Service Application shall be completed and submitted to MMWD for the proposed Leasing Office building. 48. A copy of the building permit shall be submitted with an application for service. 49. All MMWD required fees and charges shall be paid prior to authorization of service. 50. The project sponsor shall comply with the MMWD rules and regulations in effect at the time service is requested, including the installation of a new meter to serve the new structure. 51. All landscape and irrigation plans shall be designed in accordance with the most current District landscape requirements (currently from Ordinance # 385). Prior to providing water service for new landscape areas, or improved or modified landscape areas, the District shall review and approve the project's working drawing for planting an irrigation system. 52. The plans shall be designed to comply with the backflow prevention requirements, if backflow protection is warranted, including installation, testing and maintenance. 53. The use of recycled/reclaimed water is required, where available, for all approved uses. Prior to Final Building and Site Inspections 54. Upon completion of construction for each building or construction phase, the applicant shall contact the Community Development Department, Planning Division, to request a final inspection. This inspection shall require a minimum of 48-hour advance notice. 55. All damaged and new landscaping and irrigation shall be installed prior to the final inspection of the site or the property owner shall post a bond in the amount of the estimated landscaping/irrigation cost with the City of San Rafael. In the event that a bond is posted, all areas proposed for landscaping must be covered with bark or a substitute material approved by the Planning Division prior to occupancy. Deferred landscaping through a bond shall not exceed 3 months past occupancy. F 56. All exterior lighting shall be shielded so that the illumination is directed downward. Following City approval of the final inspection, all exterior lighting shall be subject to a 30 -day lighting level review by the Police Department and Planning Division to ensure compatibility with the surrounding area. I, ESTHER C. BEIRNE, 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 held on Monday, the 6`h of April, 2009, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Brockbank, Heller, Miller & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Connolly ESTHER C. BEIRNE, City Clerk IV