Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Resolution 10404 (14 Broadview Court Appeal)RESOLUTION NO. 10404 RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL UPHOLDING THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT (ED97-41 & UP97-67) TO CONVERT A 848 SQUARE FOOT LOWER LEVEL INTO A SECOND DWELLING UNIT 14 Broadview Court APN 014-033-04 WHEREAS, on December 15,1997, an application was submitted for a Use Permit and Environmental and Design Review Permit (UP97-41 & ED97-67) to allow for the establishment of a second dwelling at an existing residence located at 14 Broadview Court; and, WHEREAS, during the review process with Staff and the Design Review Board, the original proposal for a building addition was modified so that the 848 square foot second dwelling unit became incorporated into the lower level of the existing dwelling; and, WHEREAS, the San Rafael Design Review Board considered the Environmental and Design Review Permit application on April 7,1997, and stated that the addition was not in scale with the neighborhood. On June 16,1997, the Board again considered a revised proposal located within the existing dwelling and recommended approval of the proposed project to the Planning Commission; and, WHEREAS, on October 13, 1998, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed Public Hearing on the proposed Use Permit and Environmental and Design Review Permit to allow a second dwelling unit in the lower level of an existing 2,208 square foot residence located at 14 Broadview Court, accepted public testimony and the written report of the Community Development Department staff and voted to deny the project based on safety concerns regarding the driveway access to Jewell Street; and, ORIGINAL \O'�� � WHEREAS, Ed and Paula Weiss of 14 Broadview Court, owners of the project site appealed the Planning Commission's denial of the Use Permit and Environmental and Design Review Permit of the Negative Declaration, Environmental and Design Review Permit and Use Permit, and requested that the denial be approved based on the following reasons quoted and listed as Points 1 through 3 below; and, WHEREAS, the City Council considered the appeal at a duly noticed public hearing on January 19, 1999, and received public testimony on this item from all interested parties continued the meeting; and, WHEREAS, the City Council hereby upholds the appeal of the Planning Commission's decision. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the San Rafael City Council hereby makes the following determinations and findings relating to the Points of the appeal: Point #1- The proposed use is in accord with the general plan, and the objectives of the zoning ordinance and the second dwelling unit ordinance and meets all criteria for approval. That portion of the appeal relating to Point 1 is upheld. The City Council finds that the establishment of a second dwelling unit at 14 Broadview Court meets all criteria set forth for in the zoning ordinance including the required parking, setbacks, required outdoor area, and does not increase the present lot coverage and setbacks. Point #2 - The proposed use will not be detrimental to the surrounding neighbors, or to the health, safety or welfare of the community, nor injurious to properties in the vicinity. The portion of the appeal relating to Point 2 is upheld. The City Council finds that the project has been designed to minimize impacts on surrounding properties in that adequate landscaping is provided and no new driveway access is required to either of the surrounding streets. The second dwelling unit is proposed to be constructed within the existing footprint of the house. Minimal tree removal and grading is required to locate the second dwelling on the property. -2- BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby upholds the appeal, approves the proposed second unit subject to the conditions in Exhibit "A", and makes the following findings: 1. The proposed second unit is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance, and the purposes of the R7.5 District in which it is located because General Plan Policy H-27 encourages second dwelling units, the second dwelling unit is consistent with the standards of the zoning ordinance and second units are permitted in single-family residential districts. 2. Establishment of the second unit, 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 because the second unit is contained in the footprint of the existing house, does not require any significant changes to the site plan, and has been reviewed by the appropriate City departments and has been conditioned accordingly. 3. The second dwelling unit complies with each of the applicable provisions of the zoning ordinance and second dwelling unit ordinance including the required setbacks, height and parking of the R7.5 Single Family District. The project does not increase the present lot coverage or setbacks and provides adequate parking. The proposed unit is located within the present structure, has the required outdoor area, and meets the second unit size requirements. 4. The project design is consistent with all applicable site, architecture and landscaping design criteria and guidelines for the district in which it is located because the second unit is located within the existing structure, and the driveway/ parking area has been designed to minimize impacts to existing vegetation and minimize impacts on surrounding properties. 5. The project design minimizes adverse environmental impacts because minimum tree removal and grading are required for the addition of the parking area. 6. The project design of the second dwelling unit and access driveway will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, nor materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity because the project has been redesigned to eliminate a potentially dangerous driveway entrance on Jewell Street and all significant vegetation has been retained. The project has been reviewed by the appropriate City departments and has been conditioned accordingly. -3- I, JEANNE M. LEONCINI, Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of said City on Monday, the Third day of May, 1999, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ----------------- - -- ------------------ JEA LEONCINI, City Clerk -4- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL EXHIBIT "A" Environmental and Design Review Permit, ED97-41 Police Department 1. All exterior doors shall be of solid core construction with a minimum thickness of one and three-fourths inches or with panels not less than nine -sixteenth inches thick. Side garage doors and doors leading from the garage areas to private residences or multiple dwelling residences are included in this requirement. 2. Metal framed glass doors shall be set in metal door jambs. 3. Glass sliding doors shall have a secondary type locking device to the satisfaction of the Police Department. The secondary lock shall be a dead bolt lock and shall be no less than one- eighth inch in thickness and shall have a minimum hardened steel throw of one-half inch. 4. Exterior man doors and doors leading from the garage areas into the private residences or multiple dwelling residences shall have a dead locking latch device with a minimum throw of one-half inch. A secondary lock is required and shall be a dead bolt lock with a cylinder guard and a hardened steel throw that is a minimum of one inch long. Both locking mechanisms shall be keyed the same. 5. Both locking mechanisms shall be interconnected so that both may be disengaged by turning the door knob from inside. 6. Metal framed glass doors shall have a dead bolt lock with a cylinder guard and a hardened steel throw that is a minimum of 1 inch long. 7. Exterior jambs for doors shall be so constructed or protected so as to prevent violation of the function of the strike plate from the outside. The strike plate shall be secured to the jamb by a minimum of two screws which must penetrate at least two inches into the solid backing beyond the jamb. 8. Front doors shall have a front door viewer that provides a minimum of 180 degrees peripheral vision. 9. Exterior doors that swing outward shall have non -removable hinge pins. 10. In -swinging exterior doors shall have rabbited jambs. 11. Glass on exterior doors or within 40 inches of an exterior door shall be break resistant glass or glasslike material to the satisfaction of the Police Department. 12. Louvered windows shall not be installed within eight feet of the ground level. 13. Any window in or within 40 inches of an exterior door shall be stationary and nonremovable. 14. Any alternate materials or methods of construction shall be reviewed with the Crime Prevention Officer before installation. 15. The Crime Prevention Officer shall be allowed to inspect and approve the construction prior to occupancy. Fire Department 16. Based on the required fire flow, an automatic residential fire sprinkler system shall be installed in the new addition conforming to NFPA Std. 13D as modified by the fire marshal. Contact the Fire Department for the Sprinkler System Requirement Information Bulletin. 17. A permit application shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau with two sets of plans for review prior to installation of all automatic and fixed fire extinguishing and detection systems. Specification sheets for each type of device shall also be submitted for review. 18. Spark arrestors shall be installed conforming to the UBC. 19. UUSFM smoke detectors and openable bedroom windows shall be installed conforming to the Uniform Building Code. Public Works Department 20. An encroachment permit is required for any work in the street right-of-way (driveway approach). 21. At the time a building permit is applied for, a letter shall be submitted from an engineer stating that either the existing foundation is capable of supporting the new second story loads or what additional foundation work is required to properly support the new loads. Planning Division 22. The building techniques, materials, elevations and appearance of this project, as presented for approval on Sheets 1 through 4 prepared by Abey/Arnold Associates and dated February 5, 1999; and by Mike Palumbo, and dated December 10, 1997, and shall be the same as required for the issuance of a building permit. Any future additions, expansions, remodeling, etc., shall be subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department. 23. This Design Review permit shall be valid for a period of two years or until May 3, 2001, and shall thereafter become void unless building permit have been issued, or an extension has been granted by the Zoning Administrator prior to that date. 24. A seven -foot fence shall be installed on the eastern property line between the subject property and the property at 15 Broadview Court. Plans for this fence shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department before issuance of a final occupancy permit for the second dwelling unit. Use Permit UP97-67 25. A traffic mitigation fee of $694.40, adjusted according to the Lee Saylor Construction Index to take into account changes in construction costs, shall be paid at issuance of a building permit. This is based on a fee of $764.00 per trip times .85 PM peak trips in 1993 dollars. 26. This use permit is valid for a 848 square foot, second unit located 14 Broadview Court. 27. The property owner shall occupy either the main single-family dwelling or the second dwelling unit throughout the life of the second dwelling unit. Exceptions to this owner occupancy requirement may only be granted where the property owner is relocated because of illness or employment. Such exceptions may only be granted by the City Council with adoption of specific findings as part of the original use permit approval or subsequent use permit amendment. 28. The second unit is permitted exclusively for the purpose of rental, lease or in kind service and may not be sold separately. 29. This use permit for the second dwelling unit shall be recorded with the County of Marin, prior to the issuance of building permits. The purpose of recording the use permit is to put future buyers on notice that the second dwelling unit is subject to review by the City at any time and that owner occupancy is required. 30. The carport parking area is for the use of the second unit and shall not be used for storage of any kind. The carport shall be painted to match the color of the residence. 31. The carport shall be constructed and completed prior to issuance of a final occupancy permit for the second dwelling unit. 32. This Use Permit for a second dwelling unit shall be valid for a period of two years, or until May, 3, 2001 and thereafter become void unless building permits have been issued or an extension has been granted. 33. The conditions of approval of the use permit, including but not limited to the owner occupancy requirement, shall be reviewed six -months after issuance of an occupancy permit. 34. The Fire Department shall inspect the property and grounds for possible Fire Code violations.