HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRB 2018-06-05 #4SAN RAFAEL-
THE
CITY WITH A MISSION
Community Development Department— Planning Division
Meeting Date: June 5 2018
Case Numbers: ED17-090; UP17-030
Project Planner: Steve Stafford — (415) 458-5048
Agenda Item: /_/
REPORT TO DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
SUBJECT: 1203-1211 Lincoln Ave. — Request for an Environmental and Design Review Permit and Use
Permit to allow the construction of a 77 -unit, 88 -bed assisted living facility with garage parking
and site improvements on two adjacent vacant Downtown parcels with a total area of 29,885
sq. ft.; APNS: 011-184-08 & -09; Multifamily Residential — High Density (HR1) District Zone;
Geoff Forner, Applicant; ML Seven Capital Partners, LLC, Owner; Downtown Neighborhood.
PROPERTY FACTS
Location
General Plan Designation .
Zoning Designation Existing Land -Use
Project Site: High—Density Residential (HDR)
HR1
Vacant Lot
North:
HDR
HR1
SFR
South:
5/M R/O
5/M R/O
Apartment Buildings
East:
5/M R/O
5/M R/O
Service Station w/Mini-Mart
West:
HDR
HR1
Office
Lot Size
Lot Coverage (Max.)
Required:
29,885 sf
Allowed:
60%(17,931 sf)
Proposed:
6,000 sf
Proposed:
59% (17,720 sf)
Height
Density (Max.)
Allowed:
36'
Allowed:
29 units (1 unit per 1,000 sf of gross lot area)
Proposed:
35' 6" (excluding domes, trellis elevator
and staircase protruding features
Proposed:
None (`Wet bars' for assisted care units only)
Parking
Usable Outdoor Area (Min.)
Required:
42 parking spaces
Required:
None (Recommended 100 sf per unit)
Proposed:
40 parking spaces
Proposed:
5,876 sf
Landscaping (Min.)
Setbacks
Required:
50% of Front and Street Side Setback
Required Existing Proposed
(2,163 sf)
Front:
15' n/a 17.5'
Proposed:
52.9% of Front and Street Side Setback Side(s):
(2,290 sf)
Street:
10' n/a 10'
Interior:
5' n/a 6'
Rear:
5' n/a 6'
Tree Removal
Grading
Total(No.ispecies):6
(4 `mature') + 5 Street Trees (1
Total:
14,000 CYDS
`mature')
Requirement:
15 Replacement Trees Encouraged
Cut:
13,000 CYDS
Proposed:
9 Replacement Trees (3 Street
Fill:
1,000 CYDS
Trees)
Off -Haul:
13,000 CYDS
SUMMARY
The project is being referred to the Design Review Board (Board) for review of a proposed new
assisted living facility with memory care services and 40 garage parking spaces. The site is currently
vacant and the project would include site grading, drainage, landscaping and signage.
The project requires the following approvals by the Planning Commission with the recommendation of
the Board:
• An Environmental and Design -Review Permit Amendment for modifications in the design of the
approved building and site improvements; and
• A Use Permit to allow the new assisted living facility operation on the site and a Parking
Modification to reduce the parking requirement for the project, from 42 to 40 on-site parking
spaces.
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 construction of a 36 -unit
multifamily residential condominium building on two adjacent Downtown parcels at 1203 and 1211
Lincoln Ave. These project entitlements have been extended automatically by the State and by the
Planning Commission and will expire on August 7, 2018.
New owners of the project site now propose to operate an assisted living facility with memory care
services (see Project Narrative; Exhibit 2). The project proposes modifications to the approved building
and.site design to meet operational requirements consistent with the new proposed use. However, the
bulk and mass essentially is not proposed to change except for blue -tiled dome towers located at the
southeast and northeast corners of the project site.
City staff and non -city agencies have reviewed the proposed modified design plans and finds it meets
each of their requirements. Planning staff finds the proposed modified design generally meets the
applicable design -related General Plan policies, Zoning Ordinance standards, and design criteria.
However, staff requests that the Board provide its recommendations on the project's compliance with
all pertinent design criteria, including the discussion contained in this report, and specifically consider
the following:
Architecture
• Whether the new Spanish Colonial- or Mission Revival -like architecture proposed for the project is
appropriate.
Color and Materials
• Whether the new proposed colors and materials for the building and site are appropriate,
particularly, the blue tiled dome towers.
Exterior Lighting
• Whether the new proposed externally -illumination of the blue -tiled domes, located at the southeast
and northeast corners of the building, is appropriate.
Landscaping Design
• Whether the new landscape plan, without landscaping proposed for the outdoor common areas, is
appropriate.
• Whether the proposed new plant species selections, sizes and locations are appropriate.
• Whether the extent of proposed new tree plantings, particularly along the Mission Ave. frontage, is
appropriate.
2
BACKGROUND
Site Description & Setting:
The project site is comprised of two (2) adjacent parcels located at the northwest corner of the
intersection of Lincoln and Mission Avenues. The site is a combined 29,885 sq. ft. in area and has an
approximate 10% cross -slope, trending northwest to southeast. In 2007, prior buildings located on the
project site were demolished, which remains vacant.
The project site is surrounded by predominantly multifamily residential development immediately to the
north and west, a service station to the south across Mission Ave. and a mixture of commercial office
and single-family residential development to the east across Lincoln Ave.
History:
• 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 (see Approved Plans; Exhibit 5).
• In 2007, a building permit was issued for the demolition of the prior historic motor court at 1203
Lincoln Ave. and all improvements on that portion of the site were demolished and removed.
• In 2008, 2009, 2011, 2013, 2015 and 2016, the project entitlements were extended both
automatically by the State legislature and by the Planning Commission, which expire August 7,
2018.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Use:
The project proposes to operate an assisted living facility with memory care services on the project site.
Site Plan:
The project proposes a new residential structure with driveway entrances to garage parking and service
areas along both the Mission and Lincoln Avenue frontages (see Proposed Plan; Exhibit 6). Vehicle
access along Mission Ave. would lead down to a subterranean parking garage while the vehicle access
along Lincoln Ave. would beat -grade. Roll -up open grill garage doors are proposed to secure these
parking and service areas. Vehicle access to the site along Mission Ave. includes a 7.5' -wide, 85 -long
dedicated fire lane pull- out/deceleration turn pocket lane with directional controls allowing right turns
only in and out of the driveway. The driveway along the Lincoln Ave. frontage also includes directional
controls allowing right turns only in and out of the driveway. The Lincoln Ave. frontage would also
include a 8' -wide, 42 -long off-street `pull-out' for trash pick-up and deliveries.
Floor Plan:
The project proposes a four-story structure with underground parking. The first floor includes the
common area for the residents, both indoor and outdoor patio, and a small parking area with vehicle
turnaround, bicycle parking and trash receptacle areas. The second floor is exclusive to the more
secured memory care services, and includes both private and common indoor and outdoor terrace
areas. The third and fourth floors include the private assisted care suites. Common dining facilities are
proposed for both assisted care and memory care resident though each assisted care suite is proposed
to a small wet bar amenity. Both memory care and assisted care suites include both studio and one -
bedroom configurations. An 1,876 -sq. ft. roof terrace provides another common area for the residents
which also makes room for the installation of a potential solar installation.
Architecture:
The project proposes a Spanish Colonial- or Mission Revival -like architecture with predominant design
features including large arched windows, whitewashed stucco walls, red clay roof tiles and the dome
3
towers. The dome on top of the tower features are proposed to be externally -illuminated and tiled in a
color (blue) distinct from the red roof tile which would complement the blue fabric awnings along both
street elevations. Decorative heavy -timber rafter `tails' are proposed under the roof eaves. Decorative
wrought iron balconies, railings, fencing and gates are well -presented along all building facades. An
externally -illuminated, 12' -dia. circular fountain with a center statue or sculpture is proposed to be
located closest to the Mission and Lincoln Ave. intersection. This same statue or sculpture is proposed
to be installed above the driveway along Lincoln Ave. All visible stucco retaining walls, along both street
frontages, are approximately two -feet (2') in height.
A Material and Color Board will be provided at the Board's meeting.
Parking:
The project proposes to provide 40 on-site garage parking spaces. Of these, 37 parking spaces would
be in the subterranean parking garage accessed by the driveway along Mission Ave. and three (3)
additional parking spaces would be on the first floor and accessed by the driveway along Lincoln Ave.
Landscaping:
The project proposes to remove six (6) existing on-site trees on the smaller (1211 Lincoln Ave.) portion
of the site, four (4) of which are `significant' (A `significant' tree is any tree 12" or greater in diameter, as
measured 4.5' above the root crown, or any Oak tree 6" or greater in diameter, as measured 4.5' above
the root crown). In 2007, all site landscaping was previously removed from the larger parcel (1203
Lincoln Ave.) during demolition of the prior motor court. The project also proposes to remove five (5)
existing street trees along the Lincoln Ave. frontage, one (1) of which is `significant'. The project
proposes to plant new landscaping along both the Mission and Lincoln Ave. frontages, including 9
replacement trees (3 of which are new street trees along Lincoln Ave.) and a mixture of shrub, grass
and vine plantings. New landscaping is also proposed within the public right-of-way (ROW) along both
street frontages.
Grading/Drainage:
The project proposes a total of 14,000 cubic yards (CYDS) of excavation with 13,000 CYDS of `cut',
1,000 CYDS of `fill' and 13,000 YDS of off -haul. A raised, 1,036 -sq. ft., bioretention `planter' is proposed
that would bordering the first -floor outdoor rear terrace though no landscaping is proposed.
Signage:
The project proposes two (2), externally -illuminated, 12 sq. ft. wall signs, one (1) sign along each street
front, both located between the third and fourth floors and closest to the Mission and Lincoln Ave.
intersection.
ANALYSIS
General Plan 2020 Consistency:
The General Plan land use designation for the site is High Density Residential (HDR). Pursuant to Land
Use Policy LU -23 (Land Use Map and Categories) in the San Rafael General Plan 2020, land uses
typical in the HDR designation are apartments, or multifamily residential housing developments, with an
allowed gross density of 15 — 32 units/acre. The project proposes no `units' since the residential suites
do not include kitchens (the project proposes `wet bar' amenities in each assisted living suite only).
Instead, the project proposes 77 residential suites with 88 beds total. Since the bulk and mass of the
revised project is similar to the approved 36 -unit condominium project for the site, staff finds the project
is comparable to the density allowed for apartment developments. While competing General Plan
policies will directly affect whether the proposed assisted living facility use on the site is appropriate,
staff finds the proposed project is generally in accordance with the applicable design -related General
Plan Policies. As identified in the Property Facts section of staff's report above, the project.would also
be in accordance with Land Use Policy LU -12 (Building Height) and the maximum 36' building height,
based on the City's current adopted measurement for building height (Building height is measured
El
pursuant to the Uniform Building Code 1997 method). Staff requests the Board's guidance in evaluating
the project for consistency with the following design -related General Plan Policies:
• Community Design Policy CD -1 d (City Image) Landscape Improvements) recognizes that
landscaping is a critical design component to. Encourage maximum use of available landscape
area to create visual interest and foster sense of the natural environment in new and existing
developments. Encourage the use of a variety of site appropriate plant materials.
CD -2 (Neighborhood Identity) Recognize and promote the unique character and integrity of the
city's residential neighborhoods and Downtown. Strengthen the "hometown" image of San Rafael
by. a) Maintaining the urban, historic, and pedestrian character of the Downtown; b) Preserving and
enhancing the scale and landscaped character of the City's residential neighborhoods; c) Improving
the appearance and function of commercial areas; and d) Allowing limited commercial uses in
residential neighborhoods that serve local residents and create neighborhood -gathering places.
• CD -3 (Neighborhoods) seeks to recognize, preserve and enhance the positive qualities that give
neighborhoods their unique identities, while also allowing flexibility for innovative design. New
development should respect the context and scale of existing neighborhoods.
• CD -5 (Views) seeks to respect and enhance to the greatest extent possible, views of the Bay and
its islands, Bay wetlands, St. Raphael's church bell tower, Canalfront, marinas, Mt. Tamalpais,
Marin Civic Center and hills and ridgelines from public streets, parks and publicly accessible
pathways.
• CD -7 (Downtown and Civic Center) Build upon the character of these areas by controlling land uses
to clearly distinguish their boundaries; by recognizing Mission San Rafael Arcangel and St. Raphael
Church, Marin Civic Center, and other buildings that help define the City's character, and requiring
that these and other architectural characteristics and land uses that give these areas their identity
are strengthened.
• CD -9 (Transportation Corridors) seeks to improve the function and appearance of transportation
corridors, recognize those shown on Exhibits 17 and 18 and define each corridor's contribution to
the City based upon its land use and transportation function and how it is experienced by the public.
• CD -10 (Nonresidential Design Guidelines) Recognize, preserve and enhance the design elements
that contribute to the economic vitality of commercial areas. Develop design guidelines to ensure
that new nonresidential and mixed-use development fits within and improves the immediate
neighborhood and the community as a whole.
• CD -18 (Landscaping) recognizes landscaping as a significant component of all site design.
Planning staff finds the landscaping and pedestrian scale along the street frontages helps connect the
predominant residential character along Lincoln Ave., a transportation corridor, with the commercial
Downtown immediately south of the project site. The proposed Mission Revival architecture appears to
respect and not compete with the scale and design of St. Raphael's church bell tower. While the St.
Raphael's church bell tower is approximately 10' lower in height of the domed towers in the proposed
project design, St. Raphael's church bell tower is located more than two city blocks (1,100') west of the
project site and approximately 30' higher in elevation. While the towers in the proposed project design
would likely create a new view impact of Puerto Suello Hill as seen from northbound U.S. Highway 101,
staff finds this to be limited.
5
Zoning Ordinance Consistency:
Chapter 4 — Residential (R, DR, MR, HR) Districts
The site is located within the Multifamily Residential — High Density (HR1) District. The proposed
project will require consistency with the property development standards for the HR1 District, including
a maximum 36' building height, maximum 60% lot coverage, minimum required yard setbacks (15'
front; 10' street side; 5' interior side and rear) and minimum landscaping (50% of required front and
street side yards). In addition, the project voluntarily proposes to create 5,876 sq. ft. of usable common
outdoor area for the residents. Usable outdoor area is required for developments creating new
residential units; however, since the project is not proposing to create new units but, rather, residential
`suites' served by communal dining services and without individual kitchens, any usable outdoor areas
are voluntary. The project proposed to provide 20% usable outdoor area for the residents. These
property development standards applicable to the project are identified in the Property Facts summary
above. As designed, the project complies with all applicable property development standards for the
HR1 District, including maximum building height, maximum lot coverage, minimum required yard
setbacks and minimum landscaping.
Chanter 16 — Site and Use Requlations
Affordable Housing Requirement
Section 14.16.030 (Affordable Housing Requirement) requires all non-residential development projects
to comply with the City's adopted inclusionary housing requirement through the payment of an in -lieu
fee based on the type of development proposed for the site. 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 and offer ancillary services to the residents like
communal dining (both indoor and outdoor), "juice bar", "pub", "bistro", fitness, barber/salon, cinema
and activities areas, in which some of these services would not be typically found in a hotel. Therefore,
it is credible 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 nonresidential 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 $305,254.56 for the project, using the current affordable
housing in -lieu fee of $317,973.50 per unit.
Light and Glare
Section 14.16.227 (Light and Glare) requires all building colors and materials and building and site
lighting to be designed to avoid creating undue off-site light and glare impacts. Glossy finishes and
reflective glass are discouraged; site and building lighting shall be shielded to conceal light sources
from view off-site and avoid spillover onto adjacent properties. Lighting levels, generally, should meet
the following minimum amount necessary to provide a sense of security:
• One (1) foot candle at ground level overlap should be provided in all exterior doorways and in all
vehicle parking areas;
• Minimum one-half (1/2) foot candle at ground level overlap should be provided along all outdoor
pedestrian walkways; and
• Less than one (1) foot candle at ground level overlap should be provided at all property lines.
As a condition of approval, a photometric study shall be submitted for the project indicating that the
project will comply with the lighting levels prescribed by the Zoning Ordinance.
C:1
Water -Efficient Landscape
Section 14.16.370 (Water -Efficient Landscaping) requires all new landscape and irrigation
improvements to comply with Marin Municipal Water District's (MMWD) most recent water -efficient
landscape requirements (currently, MMWD Ord.429). As a condition of approval, landscape, irrigation
and grading plans shall be submitted to MMWD for review and approval prior to Building Permit or
Grading Permit issuance.
Chanter 18 — Parkina Standards
Parking Requirements
Pursuant to Section 14.18.040 (Parking Requirements), the project is required to provide a total of 42
on-site parking spaces, based on the following proposed uses:
• Assisted living facilities are required to provide one (1) parking space for each five (5) clients; plus
• One (1) parking space for each staff person, visiting doctor or employee on 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 40 on-site parking spaces and requests a Parking Modification for two (2) required on-site
parking spaces.
Parking Modification
The project requests 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 assisted living facilities similar to the project. The project
supported this request with a traffic and parking study (Transpogroup, dated May 30, 2018; attached as
Exhibit 3), which anticipates peak parking demand of 31 parking spaces for residents, staff, physicians
and guests, 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 (two City blocks southwest of the project site).
Parking Standards
The project is also required to comply the following applicable parking standards:
• Designated parking for clean air vehicles;
• Off-street loading/unloading;
• Covered, secured bicycle parking;
• Reduced Downtown parking space dimensions (8.5'x 18');
• Allowable percentage of -compact parking spaces (30% max.);
• Minimum drive aisle width (26');
• End of drive aisle parking stall access extension (2'); and
• Minimum 2 -way driveway width (24'); and
Guest parking spaces are not required in Downtown unless within 200' of a residential district. While
the project site is located within a residential district, guest parking is required for multifamily residential
projects, based on residential units. As stated earlier in staff's report, the project does not propose any
7
residential units (The project is comparable to a hotel by proposing to provide rooms or suites for
residents without individual kitchens and with communal dining and entertainment and personal
services) and, therefore, is not required to provide guest parking though voluntarily provides it. The
project has submitted a traffic and parking study to support a request for Parking Modification, which
anticipates peak parking demand of 31 parking spaces. Since the project proposes 40 parking spaces,
all parking spaces in excess of the 31 required parking spaces would be available for guest parking.
Chapter 19 — Sians
Sign Standards
Pursuant to Section 14.19.060 (Signs, Zoning District Sign Standards), the project is allowed the
following signage for the site:
• Wall, projecting/blade, awning, monument, or directory signs;
• A maximum of two (2) signs per site;
• A maximum of 25 sq. ft. of signage per site; and
• External -illumination or non -illuminated only.
Staff finds the project will comply with all applicable sign standards for the HR1 District.
Chapter 22 — Use Permits
As discussed earlier in staff's report, the proposed assisted living facility use requires Use Permit
approval by the Planning Commission (Commission). In order to approve the Use Permit, the
Commission will be required to make findings consistent with Section 14.22.080.
Chapter 25 — Environmental and Design Review Permit
The project requires Environmental and Design Review Permit approval by the Planning Commission
with the Board's recommendation. The pertinent review criteria for Environmental and Design Review
permits, pursuant to Section 14.25.050 (Review Criteria; Environmental and Design Review Permits),
are as follows:
Site Design. Proposed structures and site development should relate to the existing development in
the vicinity. The development should have good vehicular and pedestrian circulation and access.
Safe and convenient parking areas should be designed to provide easy access to building
entrances. The traffic capacity of adjoining streets must be considered. Major views of the San
Pablo Bay, wetlands, bay frontage, the Canal, Mt. Tamalpais and the hills should be preserved and
enhanced from public streets and public vantage points. In addition, respect views of St. Raphael's
Church up "A" Street.
• Architecture. The project architecture should be harmoniously integrated in relation to the
architecture in the vicinity in terms of colors and materials, scale and building design. The design
should be sensitive to and compatible with historic and architecturally significant buildings in the
vicinity. Design elements and approaches which are encouraged include. a) creation of interest in
the building elevation, b) pedestrian -oriented design in appropriate locations; c) energy-efficient
design; d) provision of a sense of entry; e) variation in building placement and height; and f) equal
attention to design given to all facades in sensitive location.
Materials and colors. Exterior finishes should be consistent with the context of the surrounding area.
Color selection shall coordinate with the predominant colors and values of the surrounding
landscape and architecture. High-quality building materials are required. Natural materials and
colors in the earth tone and wood tone range are generally preferred. Concrete surfaces should be
colored, textured, sculptured, and/or patterned to serve design as well as a structural function.
• Walls, Fences and Screening. Walls, fences and screening shall be used to screen parking and
loading areas, refuse collection areas and mechanical equipment from view. Screening of
mechanical equipment shall be designed as an integrated architectural component of the building
and the landscape. Utility meters and transformers shall be incorporated into the overall project
design.
• Exterior Lighting. Exterior lighting should provide safety for building occupants, but not create glare
or hazard on adjoining streets or be annoying to adjacent properties or residential areas.
Landscape Design. Landscaping shall be designed as an integral enhancement of the site and
existing tree shall be preserved as much as possible. Water -conserving landscape design shall be
required. A landscaped berm around the perimeter of parking areas is encouraged. Smaller scale,
seasonal color street trees should be proposed along pedestrian -oriented streets while high -
canopy, traffic -tolerant trees should be proposed for primary vehicular circulation streets.
The review criteria for Environmental and Design Review Permits require that the proposed design
(architecture, form, scale, materials and color, etc.) of all new development `relate' to the predominant
design or `character -defining' design elements existing in the vicinity.
Site Design
The project proposes modifications to the approved building and site design to meet operational
requirements consistent with the new assisted living facilities use. The bulk and mass essentially is not
proposed to change except for blue -tiled dome towers located at the southeast and northeast corners
of the project. The project would continue to propose a four-story residential structure, which would
continue to `relate' to the existing, four-story residential condominium development, located immediately
adjacent to the west of the project site.
Garage parking and vehicular circulation on the site is proposed to remain as previously approved with
driveway entrances along both Mission and Lincoln Avenues, along the west and north property
boundaries. The proposed parking generally meets the applicable parking standards though the
number of parking spaces provided is not in compliance with minimum requirements without a
reduction in the scope of the project, the granting of a Parking Modification by the City or a combination
of both. The project requests a Parking Modification to reduce the number of required on-site parking
spaces for the proposed development and uses, from 42 to 40 parking spaces, and supports the
requested Parking Modification with a traffic and parking analysis. As discussed earlier in this report,
both the Community Development Director and the City Engineer endorse the requested Parking
Modification, concurring with the assumption that the site's close proximity to the Downtown SMART
station would mitigate the parking reduction.
Vehicle access to the site along Mission Ave. includes a 7.5' -wide, 85 -long dedicated fire lane pull-
out/deceleration turn pocket lane with directional controls allowing right turns only in and out of the
driveway. The driveway along the Lincoln Ave. frontage also includes directional controls allowing right
turns only in and out of the driveway. The Lincoln Ave. frontage would also include an 8' -wide, 42 -long
off-street `pull-out' for trash pick-up and deliveries.
While the towers in the proposed project design would likely create a new view impact of Puerto Suello
Hill as seen from northbound U.S. Highway 101, staff finds this to be limited.
Staff supports the proposed site design.
Architecture
The project proposes a Spanish Colonial- or Mission Revival -like architecture with predominant design
features including large arched windows, whitewashed stucco walls, red clay roof tiles and tile dome
towers. The dome on top of the tower features are proposed to be externally -illuminated and tiled in a
color (blue) distinct from the red roof the which would complement the blue fabric awnings along both
street elevations. Decorative heavy -timber rafter `tails' are proposed under the roof eaves. Decorative
wrought iron balconies, railings, fencing and gates are well -presented along all building facades. An
externally -illuminated, 12' -dia. circular fountain with a center statue or sculpture is proposed to be
located closest to the Mission and Lincoln Ave. intersection. This same statue or sculpture is proposed
to be installed above the driveway along Lincoln Ave. All visible stucco retaining walls, along both street
frontages, are approximately two -feet (2') in height
The new revised architectural design is a departure from the approved design of the building. The 2006
approved design of building `related' to the immediately adjacent building design, the four-story
condominium building at 820 Mission Ave, with multiple mansard roofs, wide/deep eaves and upper -
floor that stepback (See approved project plans; Exhibit 5). The architectural design of the project now
proposes to `relate' to a one of the most recognizable developed forms in the Downtown, the Mission
San Rafael Arcangel and the St. Raphael's church bell tower (See proposed project plans; Exhibit 6).
Staff generally supports the proposed new Spanish Colonial- or Mission Revival -like architecture for the
building and site design, principally, given that; the bulk and mass of the structure would remain
essentially unchanged. However, staff has concerns regarding the requests the Board's comments on
the following concern:
• Whether the new Spanish Colonial- or Mission Revival -like architecture proposed for the project is
appropriate.
Colors and Materials
The new colors and materials for the revised project support the proposed Spanish Colonial- or Mission
Revival -like architecture, such as whitewashed stucco walls, red clay roof tiles and the dome towers.
The dome on top of the tower features. are proposed to be externally -illuminated and tiled in a color
(blue) distinct from the red roof tile which would complement the blue fabric awnings along both street
elevations. Decorative heavy -timber rafter `tails', in a dark stain, are proposed under the roof eaves.
Extensive decorative wrought iron balconies, railings, fencing and gates, in matte black finish, are
proposed along all building facades. A Material and Color Board shall be provided at the Board's
meeting.
Staff generally supports the proposed new color and materials for the building and site design,
principally, given that; they help express the proposed new Spanish Colonial- or Mission Revival -like
architecture. However, staff requests the Board's comments on the following concern:
• Whether the new proposed colors and materials for the building and site are appropriate,
particularly, the blue tiled dome towers.
Exterior Lighting
While approval of the project would include a condition requiring the submittal of a photometric study
confirming full compliance with the City's lighting standards, pursuant to Section 14.16.227 (i.e.,
acceptable lighting levels of one (1) foot-candle overlap at entrances and doorways, one-half (1/z) foot-
candle overlap in parking areas, and less than one (1) foot-candle at all property lines), the new blue -
tiled domes are proposed to be externally -illumination. Staff requests the Board's comments on the
following concern:
• Whether the new proposed externally -illumination of the blue -tiled domes, located at the southeast
and northeast corners of the building, is appropriate.
10
Landscape Design
The proposed project complies with the landscape requirement for the site. Greater than fifty percent
(50%) of the required front and street side yard setbacks are proposed to be landscaped. In addition,
the project proposes to re -landscape the right-of-way (ROW) planter median, located between the
sidewalk and the street curb. However, the project provides no landscaping within the outdoor common
areas, such as the outdoor terraces proposed along the Mission Ave. frontage, the second -floor rear
terrace and the roof terrace. Planning staff finds that, at a minimum, the project should provide
freestanding landscaped pots or planters around the perimeter of these outdoor common areas for the
enjoyment of the residents. In addition, staff believes the proposed bioretention planter adjacent to the
second -floor rear terrace further provides an opportunity to expand landscaping on the site. Staff
requests the Board's comments on the following concern:
• Whether the new landscape plan, without landscaping proposed for the outdoor common areas, is
appropriate.
• Whether the proposed new plant species selections, sizes and locations are appropriate.
San Rafael Design Guidelines:
On November 15, 2004, the City Council adopted the San Rafael Design Guidelines (by Resolution No.
11667), which are intended to give applicants and City staff direction in the design of new development
in accordance with the San Rafael General Plan 2020 Community Design Element's implementing
programs. These guidelines ensure that new buildings will be well landscaped and will be attractive to
pedestrians. Planning staff requests the Board's guidance in evaluating the project for consistency with
the following applicable Downtown -specific design guidelines:
Downtown Design Guidelines
Fifth / Mission District and Environs
In this area of Downtown, providing a pleasant walking environment comfortable for people at the
ground level is important. These streets are less active, and attractive streets to stroll along.
Building Design
• To provide visual interest, long, monotonous walls should be avoided.
• Where retaining walls are needed, they should be low, or terraced and landscaped
• Entries should be well-defined and orient to the street rather than to a parking lot.
Setbacks
Where setbacks are provided, they should be landscaped.
• Street trees are an important element and should be retained and enhanced.
Residential Design
• Residential building types that are oriented to and bring vitality to the street are encouraged. Building
types include townhouse and podium apartments with garages no more than one-half (1/2) level above
grade.
While consistent with the landscape requirement for the site, Planning staff has concerns that the new
landscape plan does not propose enough trees on the site, particularly street trees along Mission Ave.
Vehicle access to the site along Mission Ave. The proposed 7.5' -wide, 85 -long dedicated fire lane pull-
out/deceleration turn pocket lane contributes to the lack of street trees along the Mission Ave. frontage.
Staff finds opportunities exist to include additional trees in the new landscape plan, including eliminating
11
the proposed 12' -diameter circular fountain feature at the corner of Mission and Lincoln Avenues. Staff
requests the Board's comments on the following concern:
• Whether the extent of proposed new tree plantings, particularly along the Mission Ave. frontage, is
appropriate.
Subdivision Ordinance Consistency:
Chapter 5 — Lot Line Adjustments and Consolidations
The project proposes to construct the new assisted living facility across the legal property line
boundaries of two (2) adjacent Downtown parcels. As a condition of approval, the applicant will be
required to consolidate the two (2) parcels consistent with the submittal requirements of Section
15.05.020 for review and approval by the Community Development Director with the recommendation
of the City Engineer.
NEIGHBORHOOD CORRESPONDENCE
Notice of hearing for the project was conducted in accordance with noticing requirements contained in
Chapter 29 of the Zoning Ordinance. A Notice of Public Hearing was mailed to all property owners and
occupants within a 300 -foot radius of the project site, the appropriate neighborhood groups (the
Lincoln -San Rafael Hill Neighborhood Association), and all other interested parties (applicant and
planner), 15 calendar days prior to the date of this hearing. Additionally, notice was posted on the
project site, at the corner of Mission and Lincoln Avenues.
At the time of printing staff's report, staff had received one (1) written comment as a result of this
noticing. Ingrid Mueller, the HOA President for the condominium building (820 Mission Ave.) located
immediately west of the project site, along the Mission Ave. street front, appears to support the `high-
quality' design of the proposed project. All public comments on the project which have been received by
staff are attached as Exhibit 4.
CONCLUSION
Planning staff believes the level of details provided in the formal application generally meets the
applicable design -related General Plan Policies and Zoning Ordinance regulations and standards, with
the exception of the parking requirement for which the project submitted a parking study and requests a
Parking Modification. The project proposes to develop two (2) Downtown parcels which have been
vacant since 2007. Staff, however, requests the Board provide direction on the points specified in the
Analysis section of this report. Staff further welcomes additional comments or guidance on the any site
or building design details that would further improve the project.
EXHIBITS
1. Vicinity Map
2. Project Narrative
3. Transportation and Parking Impact Analysis, dated May 30, 2018
4. Public Comments
5. Approved Project Plans
6. Proposed Project Plans
Full-sized and reduced (11"x 17') color plans have been provided to Board members only.
cc: ML Seven Capital Partners, LLC — 1101 Fifth Ave., Suite 300; San Rafael, CA 94901
Geoff Forner — 1101 Fifth Ave., Suite 300; San Rafael, CA 94901
12
IV
E E -D /��,� r
13a bf
c 0
- as
a� aj
SL Q1 N
:
u
�+ E
3 U
ai
a�
C: n'
E
U C:
U.P�
-
u .0
4+.
a
' L
ova
Os ra
� L
-//,►--��
J
0
V
E o�
o u
E.E
�1
L QJ N
zz
u
-0 E
OO 2
r
on -100
° n. o
L -n
(U.
� Dfl
IV 70
! '+� O.V17 �.
U .
L c on
E
4-1 N Z3!I
QJ O O a-+
3 a
N
4+.
a
' L
-o 0-
Id SN�.�1
H IY=141=RAT
09
wr• `t
-__ lot
�-
J"S NQS
-es-_
c t+
� Ali � tty
r
r--V700Nt7
^' t L
b IV
L
Q
y �QQ
E
M
C.
?8 a
a
' L
668 o
Id SN�.�1
0
V
J
r
N
�
M
o;
O
N
c
T
o
LO
H IY=141=RAT
09
wr• `t
-__ lot
�-
J"S NQS
-es-_
c t+
� Ali � tty
r
r--V700Nt7
^' t L
b IV
L
Q
y �QQ
E
M
C.
?8 a
668 o
Id SN�.�1
EXHIBIT 1
V® ,_'J
Ankrom Moisan
OVERVIEW
The proposed design is a 77 -Unit Senior Housing project to be.operated by Aegis Living. It
will provide assisted living (52 resident suites) and memory care (25 resident suites)
services licensed as a Residential Care Facility for the Elderly. The building will be a four-
story structure with parking in a subterranean garage. It is located at the corner of Mission
and Lincoln in San Rafael. The project is within walking distance to downtown, the retail
district, the transit center and the SMART rail station.
The layout of the building takes advantage of the natural slope across the site, giving street
level access to the public entrances and commons amenity spaces provided for the
residents: Commons spaces on the ground level include dining venues, outdoor dining
terrace, living room, activity room, wellness/fitness suite, and cinema/auditorium.
Additional resident lounges are located on the upper floors of the building in addition to a
large rooftop terrace for outdoor activities and social functions. A large portion of the roof
is also being retained as a designated area for a potential solar PV array.
The building will have a commercial kitchen that provides all resident meals in the dining
venues on the ground level. The individual resident suites have a small wet bar area
(casework, a bar sink and a small refrigerator), but these are not intended for the
production of meals.
There are two entrances at the street level: one primary pedestrian entrance from Mission
and a covered vehicular porte cochere off Lincoln. The street level also provides access to
the parking garage ramp, as well as two turnout lanes for fire access (the one on Lincoln Ave
doubles as a loading berth).
Memory care will be located on Level 2 of the building and contains the needed
infrastructure to provide a safe, comfortable and caring environment for the residents. The
existing slope on the site allows for the entire north face facade of the memory care
commons spaces to open onto a private and secured outdoor terrace dedicated to the
memory care residents (and specifically designed to accommodate their needs). Commons
spaces dedicated to memory care include dining room, activity room/music room, spa,
lounges, and a series of memory stations.
In addition to providing excellent direct care for their residents, Aegis takes extraordinary
care to create cohesive designs that resonate with the communities they reside, while
providing an immersive experience for the occupants of the building. This works not only
ARCHITECTURE to create a sense of place for the residents, but also results in easily identifiable buildings
INTERIORS that are anchors or icons within the community. As each of their properties are unique,
URBAN DESIGN design always begins with an understanding of the history of a place. The following is an
BRANDING excerpt from the initial design meeting with Aegis - We feel that it speaks clearly to their
contextual rigor:
DESIGN CONCEPT AND HISTORICAL BASIS
MISSION SAN RAFAEL was founded in 1817 in response to concerns about the high rate of
sickness and mortality at the Mission San Francisco de Asis. Governer Sola suggested moving
some of the mission population of San Francisco to a sunnier location north of the Golden Gate
inlet. Agroup moved to this location showed immediate improvement in health and vitality.
AEGIS SAN RAFAEL
ANKROM MOISAN
EXHIBIT 2
09
Ankrom Moisan
On December 14,1817 anew mission was formally dedicated at this location to Saint Raphael,
the biblical archangel (whose name translates as "Healing of God'). At this point, San Rafael
became the first sanitarium in California.
The original mission structure was a simple compound of adobe buildings, including a
monastery, hospital, and storehouse connected by an open gallery running the length of the
compound. Unlike many California missions, no quadrangle was ever completed at the site.
The original mission was expanded and upgraded over the years, but fell into disrepair. It was
later replaced by a series of newer church buildings.
The original mission and new church were entirely rebuilt in 1949.
Following from the history of the founding of Mission San Rafael in the spirit of healing, from
the namesake of both the town and mission, the Archangel Raphael, a special Aegis senior
living experience unique to San Rafael is imagined as the ...
CASA ARCANGELO
... or House of the Archangel. A composition of California Mission design elements, with many
details and experiences focused on the unique character of place found in San Rafael, blend a
feeling of home and belonging with spirit of healing and vitality central to San Rafael's history.
In addition to the unique stylistic vocabulary of Mission Style architecture, with its white
stucco, terra cotta tiling, and distinctive detailing, we see an opportunity to weave a story
through the building at many levels, creating a strong sense of place.
Utilizing the symbolic motifs traditionally associated with'Raphael in historic iconography
(fish and staff), a rich, layered experience of space and material will complement the overall
architecture and interior design.
GENERAL DOWNTOWN DESIGN GUIDELINES
(from "Good Design Guidelines for Downtown", City Council Meeting Presentation,
February 5, 2017. Guidelines are in bold. Design responses to each follow in
standard format text.)
Each project should have an internally consistent design vocabulary
ARCHITECTURE The project employs a very consistent design vocabulary inspired by Mission Style
INTERIORS architecture. This begins with the simple massing and monochromatic color palate,
URBAN DESIGN
BRANDING using deep openings and large offsets/step-backs to break down the scale. Detail,
color and ornament are reserved for limited special feature areas on the building:
At the pedestrian entries, the figural towers, the porte cochere (main vehicular
entry), and along the roof overhangs. Contrasting clay tile roofs and wood beams
add not only detail, but also warmth to the palate.
At the ground level, the landscaping strategy is consistent with Mission Style, relying
on hardscape terraces framed by site walls and ornamental metal work. Inside the
building, the Mission Style will be seamlessly integrated into the commons spaces.
The intent is to create a single cohesive design experience from approaching the site
AEGIS SAN RAFAEL 3
ANKROM MOISAN
�� M1
Ankrom Moisan
ARCHITECTURE
INTERIORS
URBAN DESIGN
BRANDING
to the feature spaces inside the building: meaning, an integrated approach to the
architecture, landscape architecture and interior design of the project.
- Forms and materials should express the building's design intent and context
As indicated in the design concept discussion above, "blending a feeling of home and
belonging with a spirit of healing and vitality central to San Rafael's history" was
central to selection of the inspiration for the form and materials expression.
- Design strategies such as "base middle and top" are encouraged but not the
sole design alternative
The design strategies used in the project combine upper floor step -backs and
horizontal modulation moves. The simple color palate allows for the larger massing
strategies to read through the use of shadow lines. The tower elements and large
arch at the vehicular entry break down the overall mass and work to anchor the
building on the site while providing areas for detail and interest. The clay tile roof
areas and wood beams emphasize and highlight the steps in the building and work
to break down the scale.
- Height and bulk can be mitigated by step backs, articulation, use of different
materials
See discussion on design strategies above.
- Projections over public right of ways shall be limited to bay windows,
balconies and marquees
No projections over public right of ways are being proposed.
- Provide architectural interest such as strategic placement of forms and
applied features and special treatment at corners especially at intersecting
streets
At the street level, a small public plaza with water feature is being proposed at the
corner of Mission and Lincoln. Architecturally, the tower element is shifted slightly
west of the corner along Mission, but provides a composition with a series of roof
step -backs at the corner that will be experienced from both of the intersecting
streets.
- Concentrate premium materials at points of maximum enjoyment:
AEGIS SAN RAFAEL
ANKROM MOISAN
Ankrom Moisan
ARCHITECTURE
INTERIORS
URBAN DESIGN
BRANDING
o At street level
o At building entrances
o On highly visible architectural -elements
While the proposed materials for the entire building could be considered "premium
materials" (the stucco material used throughout is a custom two-tone finish
specifically chosen to highlight the texture and add a level of depth to the surface),
detail has been added at the ground level and at feature elements on the building.
The use of the arches, for example (as windows and as arched openings in the site
wall at the outdoor dining terrace) are reserved for the pedestrian level. Color is
used (blue awnings at the street level and blue tile at the domed tower roofs) to add
contrast and vibrancy at select locations. Wood infill at the upper parts of the
arches at the vehicular entries (porte cochere and the garage entry) add a level of
warmth and detail at the two ends of the building facades opposite the intersection.
- Maintain pedestrian scale, especially at the lower floors
Pedestrian scale is being managed at the street level by a combination of arched
openings and site walls of various heights. The corner of the building also contains a
tall first floor roof that breaks down the scale near the intersection of Mission and
Lincoln.
Buildings should relate to established streetscape elements such as cornice
lines, fenestration or other shared elements.
The architectural style has been chosen to be complimentary to the surrounding
context. While the building does not physically adjoin any surrounding structures, a
level of visual continuity is expected by virtue of the building's scale and step -backs
at natural floor levels.
Historic and distinguished period buildings should be retained, restored, and
if necessary repurposed as a key element of place making
There are no historic buildings existing on the site.
- New building design may include high quality contemporary architecture
The design of the project -will utilize mo-dern and contemporary construction
methods and detailing, while taking inspiration from a historic context.
- Use landscape to humanize and frame the built environment
AEGIS SAN RAFAEL
ANKROM MOISAN
(, A9 � r
Ankrom Moisan
ARCHITECTURE
INTERIORS
URBAN DESIGN
BRANDING
As noted in an earlier response, the landscaping strategy is consistent with Mission
- Style-, relying on hardscape -terraces framed by site -walls -and ornamental metal
work. As part of Aegis' operations, the landscaping will be extensive and well
maintained. Landscape is integral to the resident experience (as well as the
building's place as an icon on a prominent corner) and will be treated with the same
diligence as the architecture and interior design.
- Use durable, reusable, flexible, permeable and repairable pavement materials
In addition to being durable and easily maintained, the hard surfaces used in the
project will need to be "Senior Friendly" - uneven and slippery surfaces will be
avoided. And, as the hardscaped areas are a central part of the landscaping strategy,
the paving will need to be visually appealing and fit into the character of the Mission
Style architecture.
All mechanical equipment shall be screened and shall not project above its
enclosure
All the rooftop mechanical equipment will be screened in the areas designated on
the roof plan. Some equipment will likely be located in the garage and will be out of
public view. All mechanical outside air intakes associated with the mechanical units
at the resident units have been designed into the module of the window opening
and will be treated with grills that are complimentary to the overall aesthetic.
OTHER DESIGN CRITERIA
Tower Height:
Some concern has been expressed from the Neighborhood Association about the
prominence of the tower in our design, and a fear that it could act to compete with the
original mission. Our use of the mission style as inspiration is intended out of respect and a
desire to fit into the community, so the team has taken this concern into serious
consideration. The tower element is a critical feature in the architectural style, and we
explored many different versions of its mass and scale. Ultimately, though, the
configuration of the tower presented in the design represents proportions in comparison to
the surrounding massing typical of the architectural style. Though we have not been able to
confirm the actual height of the existing mission tower, we believe it to be roughly 10'-15'
taller than the tower proposed in this project. Also, the two buildings will never be viewed
side-by-side, and the original mission sits at a higher elevation (up the hill from the project
site). We believe that when viewed from a distance, the existing mission tower will always
appear more prominent than the one on our site. In addition, the existing mission tower
sits on a square flanked by the other mission buildings, whereas the one proposed here is
merely a massing strategy within the body of the building (thus downplaying its
prominence on the skyline).
AEGIS SAN RAFAEL 6
ANKROM MOISAN
Ankrom Moisan
ARCHITECTURE
INTERIORS
URBAN DESIGN
BRANDING
Parking and Traffic:
Aegis has engaged Transpo Group to study the traffic generated specific to their operations
(using existing facilities and measured patterns as data)._A copy of the traffic report has
been filed with Planning staff and Public Works. The team feels confident that the provided
parking is adequate for the need.
AEGIS SAN RAFAEL
ANKROM MOISAN
tr n- pogroup AYr
WHAT TRANSPORTATION CAN BE,
M E M_Q_R_A N D U M___
Date: May 30, 2018 TG: 1.18065.00
To: Walter Braun and Bryon Ziegler — Aegis Communities
From: Stefanie Herzstein, PE, PTOE and Kyle Stahley — Transpo Group
cc: Geoff Forner, Monahan Pacific Corporation
Subject: Aegis Living 1203 Lincoln (San Rafael) — Revised Transportation Impact Analysis
This memorandum identifies potential transportation -related impacts associated with the proposed
Aegis Living community in the City of San Rafael. First, the description of the project and study
scope are presented. Then, the existing and future traffic volumes, vehicle trip generation and
distribution, site access analysis, traffic operations, and non -motorized facilities are evaluated.
Project Description
The proposed project is located on the northwest corner of the Mission Avenue and Lincoln
Avenue intersection in San Rafael. It would develop an Aegis Living community that would include
77 units and be licensed for up to 88 beds. The community would have 52 assisted living units
(licensed to allow up to 58 beds) and 25 memory care units (licensed to allow up to 30 beds). The
proposed project would be similar to other Aegis Living communities developed in the Northwest.
The average age of residents would be 83 years old.
A below -grade parking garage would be provided with 37 parking spaces, which would be
accessed via Mission Avenue on the western edge of the project site. An additional 3 parking
stalls would be provided in the entry court on the north end of the site, with access provided by
Lincoln Avenue. The total on-site parking would be 40 spaces. The preliminary ground -floor site
plan illustrating the pedestrian entrances and vehicle access to the two parking areas is shown on
Figure 1. More detailed drawings, showing the ground level as well as the parking garage layout
are included in Attachment 1.
12131 113th Avenue NE, Suite 203, Kirkland, WA 98034 1 425.821.3665 1 transpogroUp.com
EXHIBIT 3
t-igure i: vrenminary mite nan
Study Scope
The scope of this analysis is based on coordination with the City of San Rafael Department of
Public Works (DPW) staff. Based on anticipated travel patterns for project -generated vehicle
traffic, the following off-site study intersections were selected and are illustrated on Figure 2:
1. Lincoln Avenue/Mission Avenue
2. Tamalpais Avenue W/Mission Avenue
3. Tamalpais Avenue E/Mission Avenue
4. Netherton Street/Mission Avenue
5. Irwin Street/Mission Avenue
6. Lincoln Avenue/5th Avenue
7. Hetherton Street/5th Avenue
8. Irwin Street/5th Avenue
9. Lincoln Avenue/4th Street
10. Hetherton Street/4th Street
11. Irwin Street/4th Street
12. Lindaro Street/3rd Street
13. Lincoln Avenue/3rd Street
14. Netherton Street/3rd Street
15. Irwin Street/3rd Street
16. Lindaro Street/2nd Street
17. Lincoln Avenue/2nd Street
18. Hetherton Street/2nd Street
19. Irwin Street/2nd Street
This study focuses on the weekday AM and PM peak hours. Traffic volume forecasts were
developed and traffic operations are evaluated for the following six scenarios:
• Existing • Baseline (2020) plus Project
• Existing plus Project a Cumulative (2040) Conditions
• Baseline (2020) 0 Cumulative (2040) plus Project
� �_�_� �.
_s i r' •
—ENTRY �.
" G''Ol7i2T
D�IVEINAY
w '
--- — — — — — — —
�
III
i
�•'•-.� � �
_
_
— 'I
U>1�
zz:.
---Zb
1
LS
-A
--A
R�
s -
MISSION AVE
I S -
t-igure i: vrenminary mite nan
Study Scope
The scope of this analysis is based on coordination with the City of San Rafael Department of
Public Works (DPW) staff. Based on anticipated travel patterns for project -generated vehicle
traffic, the following off-site study intersections were selected and are illustrated on Figure 2:
1. Lincoln Avenue/Mission Avenue
2. Tamalpais Avenue W/Mission Avenue
3. Tamalpais Avenue E/Mission Avenue
4. Netherton Street/Mission Avenue
5. Irwin Street/Mission Avenue
6. Lincoln Avenue/5th Avenue
7. Hetherton Street/5th Avenue
8. Irwin Street/5th Avenue
9. Lincoln Avenue/4th Street
10. Hetherton Street/4th Street
11. Irwin Street/4th Street
12. Lindaro Street/3rd Street
13. Lincoln Avenue/3rd Street
14. Netherton Street/3rd Street
15. Irwin Street/3rd Street
16. Lindaro Street/2nd Street
17. Lincoln Avenue/2nd Street
18. Hetherton Street/2nd Street
19. Irwin Street/2nd Street
This study focuses on the weekday AM and PM peak hours. Traffic volume forecasts were
developed and traffic operations are evaluated for the following six scenarios:
• Existing • Baseline (2020) plus Project
• Existing plus Project a Cumulative (2040) Conditions
• Baseline (2020) 0 Cumulative (2040) plus Project
�i15J10� AVE
o- tQ
z
J+ ,Q
Si z � 0°
` 6
17
Figure 2 Site Vicinity and Study Intersections
The analysis includes a review of the existing street network, transit service, and non -motorized
facilities. Transportation characteristics of the proposed project are then discussed, including the
trip generation, trip distribution and assignment. Future with -project conditions are evaluated by
adding site -generated traffic to without -project volume scenarios. Impacts of the project were
evaluated by comparing the without- and with -project conditions.
-tra n pOg rou
tNHAT TRAi\ISPORTATION CAN BE.
Existing Conditions
The following sections describe the existing street network, transit and non -motorized facilities in
the vicinity of the project site..
Street Network
Key streets in the Downtown San Rafael study area are described below.
Lincoln Avenue is a four -lane, north -south roadway, allowing two-hour parking on both sides of
the roadway outside of weekday PM peak hours. Throughout the rest of the day, the street has
one travel lane in each direction. Sidewalks are provided along both sides of Lincoln Avenue
within the study area.
Tamalpais Avenue West is a two-way street with one lane in each direction between 4th Street
and Mission Avenue. The has metered parking along both sides of the roadway. Sidewalks are
provided on the west side, opposite of the rail tracks.
Tamalpais Avenue East is a one-way northbound street between 4th Street and Mission Avenue
with metered parking on the west side. Sidewalks are provided on the east side, opposite of the
rail tracks.
12131 113th Avenue NE, Suite 203, Kirkland, WA 98034 1 425.821.3665 I transpo J otpcoin
Hetherton Street is a one-way, three -lane street with southbound traffic. No_ parking is allowed on
either side of the roadway and sidewalks are provided on both sides of Hetherton Street.
Irwin Street is a three -lane one-way northbound road which terminates at Mission Avenue at the
on-ramp to Redwood Highway. Parking is allowed on both sides of the roadway with parking on
the east side prohibited during afternoon peak hours. Sidewalks are provided along both sides of
Irwin Street.
Lindaro Street is a two-lane, north -south roadway with metered parking along the east side and
sidewalks on both sides.
Mission Avenue is a two-lane, east -west roadway with parking on the south side. Sidewalks are
provided on both sides along Mission Avenue in the vicinity of the project site.
5th Avenue is a two-lane, east -west roadway with metered parking along both sides. Sidewalks
are provided on both sides of 5th Avenue.
4th Street is a two-lane, east -west roadway with metered parking along both sides. Sidewalks and
a shared bicycle lane (marked with "sharrows") are provided along in both directions.
3rd Street is a three -lane, one-way westbound roadway with no parking. Sidewalks are provided
along 3rd Street on both sides.
2nd Street is a four -lane, one-way eastbound roadway with no parking. Sidewalks are provided
along 2nd Street on both sides.
Based on a review of the DPW's current Capital Improvement Program plan, there would be
multiple CIP projects planned in the study area. The Netherton Street / 3rd Street intersection has
traffic signal upgrades planned. In addition, there are repaving and pedestrian accessibility
projects planned in the Downtown area. As details of these improvements are not listed and would
likely have minor operational impacts, the existing intersection channelization and traffic signal
timing and phasing were maintained for future analysis conditions.
Transit
Transit service in the study area is provided by Marin Transit, Golden Gate Transit, Sonoma
County Transit, and Sonoma -Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART). The proposed project is located
within walking distance (0.3 miles or 6 -minutes) to San Rafael Transit Center, SMART San Rafael
Station, and San Rafael Greyhound Station. Transit routes serving stops within the vicinity of the
project are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1. Transit Routes-Summary
Route
Agency
Days of
Operation
Hours of Operation
Weekdays Weekends
Headway'
17 (San Rafael - Sausalito)
Marin Transit
7 days/week 6:30 a.m. —11:30 p.m.
7:30 am—11:30pm
30
22 (San Rafael — Marin City)
Marin Transit
7 days/week
6:00 a.m. —11:00 p.m.
7:00 am —11:00 pm.
30
23 (Canal — Fairfax)
Marin Transit
7 days/week
6:10 am — 9:15 pm
7:25 am — 9:30 pm
60
23X (Canal — Manor)
Marin Transit
Mon -Fri
6:25 am — 7::30 pm
-
60
27 (San Francisco — San
Golden Gate
Mon -Fri
4:30 am — 7:35 pm
-
20
Rafael/San Anselmo)
Transit
29 (Canal — Marin City)
Marin Transit
Mon -Fri
7:00 am — 7:00 pm
-
60
30 (San Francisco — San
Golden Gate
7 days/week
4:55 am — 1:55 am
5:55 am — 1:55 am
60
Rafael)
Transit
31 (Larkspur Ferry Terminal —
Golden Gate
7 days/week
5:30 am — 8:05 pm
11:25 am — 8:20 pm
30
San Rafael)
Transit
35 (Canal — Novato)
Marin Transit
7 days/week
24 hours
24 hours
30
36 (Canal — Marin City)
Marin Transit
7days/week
6:15 am — 8:10 pm
7:40 am -6:40 pm
30
38 (Sonoma Valley — San
Sonoma County
Mon -Fri
7:07 am, 6:26 pm
-
-
Rafael)
Transit
40 (San Rafael — Del Norte
Golden Gate
7 days/week
5:30 am -10:35 pm
7:20 am — 10:20 pm
30
BART Station)
Transit
40 X (San Rafael — Del Norte
Golden Gate
Mon -Fri
7:10 am- 9:10 am;
_
30
BART Station
Transit
3:45 pm — 5:45 pm
44 (San Francisco — Lucas
Golden Gate
Mon -Fri
7:10 am -8:00 am;
_
60
Valle
Valley)
Transit
6:10 pm — 7:05 pm
49 (San Rafael — Novato)
Marin Transit
7 days/week
6:15 am — 8:15 pm
7:15 am — 10:55 p,
30
68 (San Rafael — Inverness)
Marin Transit
7 days/week
6:45 am — 10:40 pm
7:45 am —11:55 pm
60
70 (San Francisco — Novato)
Golden Gate
7 days/week
5:30 am — 1:00 am
5:30 am —1:00 am
60
Transit
71 X (Sausalito — Novato)
Marin Transit
Mon -Fri
6:40 am — 6:45 pm
-
45
101 (San Francisco —Santa
Golden Gate
7 days/week
5:10 am — 1:15 am
5:10 am —1:15 pm
30
Rosa)
Transit
122 (College of Marin Express)
Marin Transit
Mon -Fri
8:15 am — 2:55 pm
-
30
125 (San Rafael — Lagunitas)
Marin Transit
Mon -Fri
7:05 am — 5:10 pm
-
-
145 (San Rafael — Terra Linda
Marin Transit
Mon -Fri
7:20 am; 2:43 pm, 3:30
-
HS)
pm
228 (San Rafael — Manor)
Marin Transit
Mon -Fri
6:30 am — 8:25 pm
7:30 am — 8:25 pm
60
233 (San Rafael — Santa
Marin Transit
7 days/week
7:00 am — 7:00 pm
7:55 am — 5:55 pm
60
Venetia)
245 (San Rafael — Smith
Marin Transit
7 days/week
7:00 am — 6:55 pm
7:00 am — 6:55 pm
60
Ranch Rd)
257 (San Rafael — Indian
Marin Transit
Mon — Fri
6:25 am -10:25 pm
-
60
Valley)
SMART
Sonoma -Marin
7 days/week
5:26 am — 8:35 pm
11:20 am — 9:55 pm.
30
Area Rail Transit
Source: Marin Transit, Golden Gate Transit Sonoma County Transit SMART and Greyhound
1 Headways in minutes during weekday PM peak periods.
As shown in Table 1, over 20 transit routes from three agencies are available in the vicinity of the
project. The San Rafael Transit Center is located approximately one-quarter mile from the project
site, which is an approximate 5 -minute or less walk. The SMART San Rafael Station is located
four blocks away from the project site and would be less than a 5 -minute walk.
3
Non -Motorized Facilities - -
The existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities near the project site are described below.
Pedestrian Facilities
The project is located in Downtown San Rafael, which has a gridded system with sidewalks along
all streets. Marked pedestrian crossing and signals are located at each traffic signal in the study
area and pedestrian phases are primarily on automatic recall. At some intersections within the
study area, curb bulbouts have been constructed to provide shorter crossing distances for
pedestrians.
Bicycle Facilities
The Marin County North-South Greenway bicycle trail is located two blocks from the proposed
project and is accessed via Mission Avenue or Paloma Avenue. Within the Downtown street
network, bicyclists are accommodated on some streets with sharrow lane markings including 4th
Street.
Trip Generation
Transportation is primarily provided for Aegis Living residents via private shuttles operated by the
facility, with most vehicle trips to the site generated by employees and visitors. Vehicle ownership
by residents rarely occurs as the average age of residents is 83. Shift times for staff also start and
end prior to the typical weekday commuter periods'. These characteristics result in overall low trip
generation for the Aegis Living facilities compared to traditional assisted living facilities.
The trip generation for the proposed development was estimated based on data from two existing
Aegis Living Communities that provide similar staffing and residential care characteristics as the
proposed facility. In addition, the existing facilities are similar in size and were located in a
suburban setting where the majority of trips are vehicle -oriented. Given the location of the
proposed site in Downtown San Rafael, there may be fewer vehicle trips by staff and visitors who
instead may use transit, walk or bike to the site. Thus, use of the trip generation data from the
more suburban areas would provide a conservative analysis.
Data was collected at two Aegis Living Communities in Washington State (Bellevue and Kirkland)
for three consecutive weekdays in March 2014. The total of 6 days of data was used to determine
a weighted average trip generation rate for Aegis Living Communities. The two communities
surveyed include a 105 -bed facility in Kirkland, WA and an 86 -bed facility in Bellevue, WA. Both
communities provide a mix of assisted living and memory care units and on-site staff work the
same shifts planned for the proposed San Rafael location. Table 2 summarizes the weekday PM
peak hour trip generation study for the two existing sites.
I There are three staff shifts: 6 a.m. to 2 p.m., 2 p.m. to 10 p.m. and 10 p.m. to 6 a.m.
Table 2. _ Aegis Living Weekday_ PM Peak Hour Trip Generation Study
In
Community Date Size Total Trips' Inbound Trips Outbound Trips
Aegis Lodge — Kirkland
Tues. 3/25/2014
105 beds
13
3
10
Aegis Lodge — Kirkland
Wed. 3/26/2014
105 beds
26
10
16
Aegis Lodge — Kirkland
Thurs. 3/27/2014
105 beds
25
8
17
Aegis of Bellevue
Tues. 3/25/2014
86 beds
16
3
13
Aegis of Bellevue
Wed. 3/26/2014
86 beds
25
8
17
Aegis of Bellevue
Thurs. 3/27/2014
86 beds
23
6
17
ftighted
Average Ratds
I
ab'd
I
1. Total trips based on the highest one-hour of inbound and outbound driveway trips during the 4 to 6 p.m. peak hour of adjacent street
traffic on each of the 6
days surveyed.
As shown in Table 2, the weighted average trip rate for the existing facilities is 0.22 trips per bed
during the weekday PM peak hour. Of these trips, 30 percent were observed to be inbound and
the remaining 70 percent were outbound.
The trip generation studies completed for existing Aegis Living communities did not include daily
or weekday AM peak hour counts; therefore, the weekday PM peak hour trip generation rate was
compared to the land use descriptions and trip generation rates for the Assisted Living and
Nursing Home land uses from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation
Manual (10th Edition, 2017). This comparison shows the Aegis Living facilities have similar
transportation characteristics to a nursing home given the staffed care for residents and the
majority of residents not owning or operating private vehicles. The trip generation rate for the
Nursing Home land use (#620) is 0.22 trips per bed during the weekday PM peak hour, consistent
with the trip rate observed for the existing Aegis Living communities. Based on this, the ITE
Nursing Home trip generation rate was used to calculate weekday daily and AM peak hour vehicle
trip estimates for the proposed San Rafael Aegis Living community. As nursing homes require
greater around-the-clock care compared to the proposed Aegis Living community, it is likely that
the number of daily trips would be less for the proposed development than the nursing home trip
generation rate would indicate.
A summary of the trip generation estimates for the weekday daily, AM and PM peak hour time
periods is shown in Table 3. Detailed trip generation calculations are included in Attachment 2.
Table 3. Weekday Trip Generation Estimates
Daily' AM Peak Hour' PM Peak Hour'
Size' (In / Out) (In / Out) (in / Out)
Aegis Living Community 88 beds 270 (135 / 135) 15(11/4) 19 (6 / 13)
1. The project proposes to develop 77 residential living units which would be licensed to allow up to 88 beds.
2. Based on the average trip rate (3.06 trips per bed) for Nursing Home from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip
Generation Manual (10th Edition, 2017).
3. Based on the average trip rate (0.17 trips per beds) for Nursing Home from ITE Trip Generation Manual (10th Edition, 2017).
4. Average trip rates (0.22 trips per bed) based on trip generation studies conducted at existing Aegis Living communities with similar
sizes, types of care, and location characteristics as the proposed project.
As shown in Table 3, it is estimated the project would generate approximately 270 daily vehicle
trips with 15 trips during the weekday AM peak hour and 19 trips during the weekday PM peak
hour.
Project Trip Distribution and Assignment
The trip distribution for project trips was estimated using data from the US Census's OntheMap
online tool and input from DPW staff. The OntheMap tool summarizes commute patterns using the
census tracts where people live and work. It is anticipated that the majority of trips to and from the
site _during the weekday AM and PM peak periods would be related to employees. The proposed
project trip distribution throughout the City's grid network is shown on Figure 3.
Y
r�
(1) 1 1 —►
LEGEND
t, I x Weekday PM Peak i
4 (1) -`- Hour Traffic Volumes
i (3) 1 (X) Weekday AM Peak
Hour Traffic Volumes
Z4 TtipDishibWon
Figure 3 Project Trip Distribution and Assignment
The trip generation for the proposed project was assigned to the adjacent roadways and
intersections during the weekday AM and PM peak hours as shown on Figure 3. As shown in the
figure, it is anticipated that the Lincoln Avenue/Mission Avenue intersection nearest the site would
have the highest number of trips, with 12 trips estimated during the weekday AM peak hour and 15
trips during the weekday PM peak hour. Increases at other intersections within the downtown are
generally low ranging between 0 to 7 trips.
Vehicle Traffic Volumes
The following sections describe weekday AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes for the six analysis
scenarios.
Existing Traffic Volumes
Existing (2017) traffic volumes were obtained from City of San Rafael staff. Traffic volumes from
existing weekday AM and PM peak hour Synchro models were used as a basis for analysis.
Existing traffic volumes at each of the study intersections are shown in Attachment 3.
Existing Plus Project Traffic Volumes
Project trip generation for the weekday AM and PM peak hour was distributed and assigned to the
study intersections consistent with the travel patterns shown on Figure 3. These volumes were
added to the existing traffic volumes to form the existing plus project traffic volumes. The weekday
AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes at each study intersection are shown in Attachment 3.
�r 6
Baseline- Traffic Volumes -
The existing traffic volumes were grown to account for general background growth and previously
approved projects in the study vicinity. An annual background growth rate of 1.5 percent per year
was applied to the existing traffic volumes to determine 2020 background traffic conditions. Traffic
from the Seagate Multifamily residential development at 703 3rd Street, which is currently under
review, but not permitted, was included as part of the baseline 2020 forecasts. The weekday AM
and PM peak hour traffic volumes at each study intersection are shown in Attachment 3.
Baseline Plus Project Traffic Volumes
Project trip generation was distributed and assigned to the study intersections. These volumes
were added to the baseline without -project traffic volumes to forecasts the baseline plus project
conditions. The baseline plus project conditions reflects the anticipated forecast traffic volumes
during the year of opening for the proposed project. The weekday AM and PM peak hour traffic
volumes at each study intersection are shown in Attachment 3.
Cumulative Traffic Volumes
The Cumulative 2040 horizon year accounts for population and employment growth in the
Downtown Area as anticipated with the General Plan. The City is currently updating the General
Plan and the current published plan reflects 2020 conditions; therefore, the future traffic volumes
are calculated using growth rates observed between the 2009 and 2040 travel demand model
volumes provided by the City. An average annual growth rate of 0.2 percent per year was
determined for the Downtown study area for both the weekday AM and PM peak hours. The 0.2
percent per year annual growth was applied to existing (2017) volumes to calculate future (2040)
volumes. As the model volumes reflect the growth between 2009 and 2040, traffic from planned
projects, such as the 703 3rd Street development, would be included in the model growth and
were not added to the Cumulative traffic volume forecasts. The weekday AM and PM peak hour
traffic volumes at each study intersection are shown in Attachment 3.
Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Volumes
The project trips were added to the traffic volumes developed for the Cumulative Conditions. The
resulting traffic volumes reflect the Cumulative Plus Project Conditions. The Cumulative Plus
Project weekday AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes at each study intersection are shown in
Attachment 3.
Traffic Operations
The traffic operations were evaluated using Synchro 9.1 software based on the 2010 Highway
Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board [TRB], 2011) method. At intersections where
the 2010 HCM method is not valid due to channelization or signal timing, the HCM 2000 (TRB,
2000) method was used to evaluate traffic operations.
Existing signal phasing and timing, intersection channelization, and traffic volumes were based on.
the existing conditions Synchro models provided by the City for the weekday AM and PM peak
hours. Signal phasing, signal timing, and intersection channelization from the existing Synchro
model were maintained in the future conditions. This provides a conservative analysis as it is likely
that traffic signal timing and phasing would be optimized regularly to provide the best operations
with future increases in traffic. In the Downtown area, each of the study intersections has a level of
service (LOS) E operational threshold. Detailed traffic operations worksheets are included in
Attachment 4.
The existing and existing plus project traffic operations are shown in Table 4. The differences in
delay and LOS between the two scenarios show the relative impact the project.
Table 4. Existing- (2017) Weekday AM_ and PM Peak Hour LOS_ Summary -
2017 Existing Conditions 2017 Existing plus Project Conditions
Intersection
LOS' Delay2 LOS Delay
Weekday AM Peak Hour
1.
Lincoln Avenue/Mission Avenue
B
17.5
B
17.8
2.
Tamalpais Avenue W/Mission Avenue
B
13.5
B
13.6
3.
Tamalpais Avenue E/Mission Avenue
C
30.9
C
32.7
4.
Hetherton Street/Mission Avenue
C
26.8
C
27.1
5.
Irwin Street/Mission Avenue
D
40.7
D
40.9
6.
Lincoln Avenue/5th Avenue
B
15.5
B
15.5
7.
Hetherton Street/5th Avenue
A
6.3
A
6.3
8.
Irwin Street/5th Avenue
C
34.1
C
34.3
9.
Lincoln Avenue/4th Street
B
17.5
B
17.5
10,
Hetherton Street/4th Street
C
22.2
C
22.2
11.
Irwin Street/4th Street
B
17.6
B
17.6
12.
Lindaro Street/3rd Street
A
4.0
A
4.0
13.
Lincoln Avenue/3rd Street
D
42.6
D
42.6
14.
Netherton Street/3rd Street
C
23.7
C
23.7
15.
Irwin Street/3rd Street
B
16.2
B
16.3
16.
Lindaro Street/2nd Street
C
24.1
C
24.1
17.
Lincoln Avenue/2nd Street
C
27.6
C
27.6
18.
Hetherton Street/2nd Street
C
24.4
C
24.5
19.
Irwin Street/2nd Street
B
19.5
B
19.5
Weekday PM Peak Hour
1.
Lincoln Avenue/Mission Avenue
B
15.6
B
15.7
2.
Tamalpais Avenue W/Mission Avenue
A
9.6
A
10.0
3.
Tamalpais Avenue E/Mission Avenue
C
33.8
D
36.9
4.
Netherton Street/Mission Avenue
C
22.5
C
22.6
5.
Irwin Street/Mission Avenue
D
47.1
D
47.2
6.
Lincoln Avenuel5th Avenue
B
10.8
B
10.8
7.
Netherton Street/5th Avenue
A
9.2
A
9.2
8.
Irwin Street/5th Avenue
E
56.9
E
57.3
9.
Lincoln Avenue/4th Street
B
14.0
B
14.0
10.
Netherton Street/4th Street
B
10.6
B
10.6
11.
Irwin Streetl4th Street
C
21.6
C
21.8
12.
Lindaro Street/3rd Street
A
5.2
A
5.2
13.
Lincoln Avenue/3rd Street
C
25.7
C
25.7
14.
Hetherton Street/3rd Street
C
29.4
C
29.4
15.
Irwin Street/3rd Street
C
20.1
C
20.2
16.
Lindaro Street/2nd Street
C
27.7
C
27.7
17.
Lincoln Avenue/2nd Street
C
25.8
C
25.8
18.
Netherton Street/2nd Street
B
15.2
B
15.2
19.
Irwin Street/2nd Street
D
46.9
D
46.9
1. Level of service, evaluated using HCM 2010 (TRB, 2011) methodology unless phasing or channelization limitations that do not allow
for HCM 2010 analysis in which HCM 2000 (TRB, 2000) was used.
2. Average delay in seconds per vehicle.
8
As shown in Table 4, -all intersections are anticipated -to meet the City's LOS threshold during
existing (2017) and existing plus project conditions and operate at LOS E or better during the AM
and PM peak hours.
The baseline and baseline plus project traffic operations are shown in Table 5. The differences in
delay and LOS between the two scenarios show the relative impact of the project for baseline
conditions.
�r
Table 5. - Baseline -(2020) Weekday AM and -PM -Peak -1 -lour LOS Summary - -
2020 Baseline plus Project
2020 Baseline Conditions Conditions
Intersection LOS' Delay2 LOS Delay
Weekday AM Peak Hour
1.
Lincoln Avenue/Mission Avenue
B
19
B
19.4
2.
Tamalpais Avenue W/Mission Avenue
B
15.7
B
16
3.
Tamalpais Avenue E/Mission Avenue
D
40.9
D
43.4
4.
Hetherton Street/Mission Avenue
C
30.2
C
30.6
5.
Irwin Street/Mission Avenue
D
45.3
D
45.5
6.
Lincoln Avenue/5th Avenue
B
15.5
B
15.5
7.
Netherton Street/5th Avenue
A
6.5
A
6.5
8.
Irwin Street/5th Avenue
D
37.1
D
37.3
9.
Lincoln Avenue/4th Street
B
17.7
B
17.7
10.
Hetherton Street/4th Street
C
22.2
C
22.2
11.
Irwin Street/4th Street
B
19
B
19.1
12.
Lindaro Street/3rd Street
A
4.4
A
4.4
13.
Lincoln Avenue/3rd Street
D
46.2
D
46.2
14.
Netherton Street/3rd Street
C
25.5
C
25.5
15.
Irwin Street/3rd Street
B
17.9
B
17.9
16.
Lindaro Street/2nd Street
C
25
C
25
17.
Lincoln Avenue/2nd Street
C
28.6
C
28.6
18.
Netherton Street/2nd Street
C
30.7
C
30.8
19.
Irwin Street/2nd Street
C
21.7
C
21.7
Weekday PM Peak Hour
1.
Lincoln Avenue/Mission Avenue
B
16.6
B
16.8
2.
Tamalpais Avenue W/Mission Avenue
B
11.0
B
11.3
3.
Tamalpais Avenue E/Mission Avenue
D
45.3
D
47
4,
Netherton Street/Mission Avenue
C
26
C
26.1
5.
Irwin Street/Mission Avenue
D
52.9
D
53.0
6.
Lincoln Avenue/5th Avenue
B
10.8
B
10.7
7.
Hetherton Street/5th Avenue
A
9.4
A
9.4
8.
Irwin Street/5th Avenue
E
67.4
E
67.8
9.
Lincoln Avenue/4th Street
B
13.7
B
13.8
10.
Hetherton Street/4th Street
B
10.7
B
10.7
11.
Irwin Street/4th Street
C
28.2
C
28.5
12.
Lindaro Street/3rd Street
A
5.1
A
5.1
13.
Lincoln Avenue/3rd Street
C
26.5
C
26.5
14.
Netherton Street/3rd Street
D
35.3
D
35.3
15.
Irwin Street/3rd Street
C
25.3
C
25.5
16.
Lindaro Street/2nd Street
C
28.6
C
28.7
17.
Lincoln Avenue/2nd Street
C
26.7
C
26.7
18.
Netherton Street/2nd Street
B
18
B
18.1
19.
Irwin Street/2nd Street
E
56.8
E
56.9
1.
Level of service, evaluated using HCM 2010 (TRB, 2011) methodology unless phasing or channelization limitations that do not allow
for HCM 2010 analysis in which HCM 2000 (TRB, 2000) was used.
2.
Average delay in seconds per vehicle.
�r 10
As shown in Table 5, all intersections are anticipated to meet -the City's LOS threshold during
baseline and baseline plus project conditions and operate at LOS E or better during the AM and
PM peak hours.
The cumulative conditions and cumulative plus project traffic operations are shown in Table 6. The
differences in delay and LOS between the two scenarios show the relative impact of the project on
the cumulative conditions.
Table 6. Cumulative (2040) Weekday AM and PM Peak Hour LOS Summary
2040 Cumulative plus Project
nnAn r-nnrlitinnc
Intersection LOS' Delay2 LOS Delay
Weekday AM Peak Hour
1.
Lincoln Avenue/Mission Avenue
B
19.8
C
20.3
2.
Tamalpais Avenue W/Mission Avenue
B
16.2
B
16.5
3.
Tamalpais Avenue E/Mission Avenue
D
43.5
D
46.1
4.
Netherton Street/Mission Avenue
C
31.0
C
31.4
5.
Irwin Street/Mission Avenue
D
45.5
D
45.7
6.
Lincoln Avenue/5th Avenue
B
15.6
B
15.6
7.
Hetherton Street/5th Avenue
A
6.4
A
6.4
8.
Irwin Street/5th Avenue
D
37.9
D
38
9.
Lincoln Avenue/4th Street
B
17.8
B
17.8
10.
Hetherton Street/4th Street
C
22.2
C
22.2
11.
Irwin Street/4th Street
B
19.4
B
19.5
12.
Lindaro Street/3rd Street
A
4.5
A
4.5
13.
Lincoln Avenue/3rd Street
D
48.3
D
48.3
14.
Netherton Street/3rd Street
C
26.1
C
26.1
15.
Irwin Street/3rd Street
B
18.3
B
18.4
16.
Lindaro Street/2nd Street
C
25.1
C
25.1
17.
Lincoln Avenuel2nd Street
C
28.8
C
28.8
18.
Netherton Street/2nd Street
C
32.3
C
32.5
19.
Irwin Street/2nd Street
C
22.3
C
22.4
Weekday PM Peak Hour
1.
Lincoln Avenue/Mission Avenue
B
16.8
B
16.9
2.
Tamalpais Avenue W/Mission Avenue
B
11.3
B
11.6
3.
Tamalpais Avenue E/Mission Avenue
D
46.5
D
48.6
4.
Netherton Street/Mission Avenue
C
26.6
C
26.8
5.
Irwin Street/Mission Avenue
D
53.5
D
53.6
6.
Lincoln Avenue/5th Avenue
B
10.9
B
10.8
7.
Hetherton Street/5th Avenue
A
9.4
A
9.5
8.
Irwin Street/5th Avenue
E
70.1
E
70.5
9.
Lincoln Avenue/4th Street
B
13.8
B
13.8
10.
Netherton Street/4th Street
B
10.9
B
10.9
11.
Irwin Street/4th Street
C
30.7
C
31
12.
Lindaro Street/3rd Street
A
5.1
A
5.1
13.
Lincoln Avenue/3rd Street
C
26.7
C
26.7
14.
Netherton Streetl3rd Street
D
35.2
D
35.2
15.
Irwin Street/3rd Street
C
26.7
C
26.9
16.
Lindaro Street/2nd Street
C
28.8
C
28.9
17.
Lincoln Avenuel2nd Street
C
26.9
C
26.9
18.
Hetherton Street/2nd Street
B
18.7
B
18.8
19.
Irwin Street/2nd Street
E
59.1
E
59.2
1.
Level of service, evaluated using HCM 2010 (TRB, 2011) methodology unless phasing or channelization limitations that do not allow
for HCM 2010 analysis in which HCM 2000 (TRB, 2000) was used.
2.
Average delay in seconds per vehicle.
'r 12
As shown in Table 6, all intersections are anticipated to meet the City's level of_service (LOS)
threshold under cumulative (2040) conditions operate at LOS E or better both with and without the
project during the AM and PM peak hours.
Site Access Analysis
The proposed project provides two site accesses, one from Mission Avenue and one from Lincoln
Avenue. The Mission Avenue driveway provides access to 43 parking spaces provided in the
below -ground garage. The driveway on Lincoln Avenue provides access to 3 parking spaces
provided in the at -grade surface lot, which would provide ADA parking and loading/unloading to
the building's entrance. A summary of the traffic operations at the site access locations is shown in
Table 7.
Table 7. Baseline (2020) plus Project Site Access LOS Summary
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Intersection LOS' Delay' WM3 LOS Delay WM
A. Site Access/Mission Avenue D 29.7 SB E 38.7 SB
B. Lincoln Avenue/Site Access D 29.5 EB E 41.0 EB
1. Level of service, evaluated using HCM 2010 (TRB, 2011) methodology unless phasing or channelization limitations that do not allow for
HCM 2010 analysis in which HCM 2000 (TRB, 2000) was used.
2. Average delay in seconds per vehicle.
3. Worst movement reported for unsignalized intersections.
As shown in Table 7, the two driveways are anticipated to operate at LOS D during the weekday
AM peak hour and LOS E during the weekday PM peak hour under baseline plus project
conditions. It is anticipated that the on-site queues would be minimal and accommodated with the
garage design. The peak hour conditions shown above for the site access driveways reflect the
highest amount of delay which would occur and during most periods, including the staff shift
changes, would be less due the decreased amount of traffic on the adjacent streets. If drivers
exiting the driveways during peak hours decide that the maneuver is too difficult to make there are
alternate paths through the City's Downtown gridded transportation network they could use by
making right -turns from the garage.
As mentioned previously, the site is served by transit and sidewalk and bicycle facilities within
Downtown. The site is within short walking distance of the transit center and SMART Station.
Sidewalks are provided adjacent to the project on Mission Avenue and Lincoln Avenue and
pedestrian signals and marked crossings are present at the Mission Avenue/Lincoln Avenue
intersection as well as at the other intersections in Downtown. The Marin County North-South
Greenway bicycle trail is located two blocks from the project site and is accessed via Mission
Avenue or Paloma Avenue. Given the access to alternative modes, trip generation may be lower
than projected and driveway operations may be better than anticipated.
Parking
As described previously, the proposed development would provide a total of 40 parking spaces.
There would be 37 single -sized spaces in the garage. An additional 3 parking spaces which would
be used to provide ADA parking and short-term loading and unloading would be available via the
courtyard area accessed off Lincoln Avenue.
The parking demand for the project was estimated using rates published in the ITE Parking
Generation (4th Edition, 2010) for Nursing Home land use consistent with the trip generation. The
estimated average peak parking demand for the project, for both the typical weekday and
weekend, are shown in Table 8.
j� 13
Table 8. Weekday and Weekend Parking Demand Estimates
Weekday Weekend
Land Use Size Rate' Demand Rate' Demand
Aegis Living Community 88 beds 0.35 per bed 31 vehicles 0.26 per bed 23 vehicles
1. Based on the peak weekday parking demand rate for the Nursing Home land uses in the ITE Parking Generation (4th Edition, 2010).
2. The weekend trip rate was based off the highest parking demand rate for Saturday or Sunday for the nursing home land use from the
Parkina Generation manual.
As shown in Table 8, the peak parking demand for the site is estimated to be 31 vehicles. The
development would provide 40 total parking spaces; therefore, it is estimated that the parking
supply should meet the proposed development's anticipated demand.
Summary and Conclusions
The proposed project would develop a 77 -unit Aegis Living facility on a currently vacant lot on the
northwest corner of the Mission Avenue and Lincoln Street intersection in San Rafael. The
development would include 52 assisted living dwelling units with a maximum of 58 total beds and
25 memory care units with a maximum of 30 total beds. Aegis Living facilities provide staffed care
for residents and the majority of residents do not own or operate private vehicles. Transportation is
provided for residents via private shuttles operated by the facility, with vehicle trips to the site
primarily generated by either employees or visitors.
Based on the proposed land uses, the project is anticipated to generate approximately 270 daily
vehicle trips with 15 occurring during the weekday AM peak hour and 19 occurring during the
weekday PM peak hour. Traffic operations are anticipated to meet the City's LOS E for the
existing, baseline, and cumulative conditions in the weekday AM and PM peak hours.
The project is anticipated to have a peak parking demand of 31 vehicles. The parking demand is
anticipated to be fully accommodated on-site with the proposed 40 parking spaces.
No significant traffic or parking i.mpacts are anticipated as a result of the proposed project.
14
Atto-e oment I
Preliminary Site Plan and Parking Layout
`n
e; m r § i(§/ E\& /■! _ ^
/ \k / aEgsSAN RAAEL /|/k Z2
m a MI mA AVENUE �� a� e ., Q q o
2 / \ §4 �| (/ ' w
\ § § ® §
` § ASC SAN ��� k
\ m 2
°§ ;
i ! {
,! n 11 II 111 I e
X11-1I�+11� all
i ;—
II����r�=1n�
IIIA+I--�rl �fll{�►II�I „��—,r-1.11
--------i---i-- 1
+I=I
= 11= I I
s �
I z I
rI
s
11111 � I
o
IEll I I
-III=
D
ell '
AEGIS SAN RAFAEL
1 _ �
'r
I I v it it §��!_�
IL JL JL J,__
'
I
_ - !
F
- — •- rr•c y -
._._......._— - — - i - __T
800 MISSION AVENUE SAN RAFAEL CA 94549
i I -III
I-- t !
I 1i-
1
Ju
WE
ii hI I I j -11IEI11
=fEl]
I
Fl
TV
N IP i i 1LII.S-�i::'I_er'J II ;
Z I t ► _ f_`7�7! _ _ _ I $ –�
vm
y �- -- - �/
I I
i I +
__41
25
i4 I
.:a r-------- { I 20
♦ t 9
41
� k I
r
---{-------------------
-r,
---- - ---- ---_-- -_._ _ �
P- ___
y.t , t_____--___ _ _ I
• r . — --- ••yyam�••— — _TT�— —_ __ _
+ - ° lo• -fit .rF
•� +,, _—_I_
r
Y-4-�(J�r – ---i– I ---- I-- _� _� (' �; � � I _•f L
6:. _� 1 �o j�('a }�-� {/-• Ic Li> a 3 o a J R r= lol f Cis- 3 i 1•'f ! -' n i (•1
�b 7"� a � - °�' J ` c 1S♦ �` ° _ ° ` ° �° } L+ r 1=i� (; �',-� � t� � r�,`�1� I j � �'+ � z �X';�'���� �' � 1!
rl �_ ��� -y < \ � � �' I r v s�• ° -i>l -. l,-. ' %1Yf )x( f a ���a. �I.Nn.11.f"..J�L1�:� �) � �}`� j;"' 1?111 INv 'i a' - �3?�� �,( 'p
�.�.� •�/s��Y�l�f. #' �• �+;�; � _I�-•.' .�_j-1 �.-!-.i� �--r�7_ii===� �-1J :!¢.}' I �'� I a x- (> (?I}.C: F7
��°�'�`in -� , r'i cit=�l(: ,.?t•l(rt a�< <�t '� :.;j0 Ir �`
;
k
•\` ._—�•,,,,y TNASY 6FKVQF K I ,• O•' IJ
%—,
- V _- I Flcwu;'�UEVfcNES � I •r.• �.. i - '�•• "-o--• i '`' �' .tet
_+
w t
> + n LINCOLN AVE _-` ---k
ov
m
D
AEGIS SAN RAFAEL
o
800 MISSION AVENUE SAN RAFAEL CA 94549
o fl n $ _ L O
4 W $ C -n
a
F-
v
ASC SAN RAFAEL LLC
n O
v�
to
E
Attachment 2:
Detailed Trip Generation Calculations
18
m
E
E�(
U) L
a
0
O 0 i- (I-) I-- t--
0
a
�
0
ch Q co co co co
m
W LO M LO M
T N N T N N
FO
cn cn cn w U) co
N
N N N
Fo
co QD
O O O(D
T T T co co co
T T
0 0 0 0 0 0
N N N N N N
0
LO tj
N N N N N N
p
c i co c*> ro
y
M M Co
E
L L L
Y Y Y D= m
0
I I ai
U
I 0) aa)
_ _
0) � z --d5 6
-0 -0 o CO M CO
J .J _1 0 0 0
S2 � � �
0) 0) 0) m .0 .6
0 N N
Q •Q `Q 'Q 'Q 'Q
"t LO T M d- LO d' LO I� CO I-- M I- N I`
C 0 N C7 C7 N N T r N N N N N N M M M M M M N N N r r r
C
d 0 0 _
r
'N O O CO Il- o r Ln ',I-
CN
T r r r r
h 0
N F-
L �
C� 0
G
M LO d' M O N N T N N N o d M cD O (D LO M M T rY O T N T T r
.a C
to
L
O LO O LO O U) O LO O LO O LO O LO O UO O LO O U) O Ln O Ui O LO O LO
cf- O r M 'rh O r M 'V' O T CO d'
r c T N N N N M c� c7 co d
It LO M LO LO CD CD CD CD 1- I- I`
-V--I
C-
E
E
0
U
CD
CDco
U
>Q O
N
r
O
.O N
>C: L
O M N
CD c V
W
> _
N O N j
-0 N In
O o _0 F-
00
--
�- N
Q 00
0) M M LO O r LO Il - N N M T N O M O M d' N O O II - T M M LO
C
00, 0 2
N Cfl N �t LO M N M O d' d'
T
0
h
O r N dt LO CO N N r r <- O
7
0
r O T N U) LO o N r d r O M N d N r r r M LO r r r N O
C
O LC) O M O M O M O LO O M O M (D M O M O LO O M O M O N O M
O CD O T M d' O r M It O o T M 'Ci' O T --
,I-
d' LO LL) M LC) CO CD co O I- I` I` Il -
0 O
0 0
LO O 't d CD "t M r O M I- I` U) O U) M N M � �t N r O
td r
0
F-
O r r M CD N N M N N T LC) M O
0
0
LO N CO O d- d' r M* M T N r CO 't N M 'T M r T r r O O O O
c
O 0 O LO o LO O LO O Ln o M O w O Ll) O LO o LO O Lo o N O LO CD LO
O T CO -' O T CO d' O r C7 d' O '- M 'tT O T CO �t O r M `Ct O T M d,
in
a)
C
CD
C
CE
C
0
U
Nt (D
c� co
o U
Q O
N
O
M L6
��- N
x W > i
L Z
Y a� -0
>
a� Q
Q
O r O
J r- N
H
.Q
O N O
0) L
C N =
O O
X0,02
m
0
F-
O
C:'
CD CO 1,- O O t� d' O I-- M to M r LO LO O M CD N
aO M O M M M d' M O M r Lo CD Lo O d' ul W d' d' 0 1- N O
r r r
d' r d• O M N 'V d' M d' N N LO M M N d' M M M LO W t N M N r- O
d' N M M Lo d' r d' N d' N W M O CO M N N 1- r d• N O N O M r O
CD LO O LO O LO O M o LO O M O M O M o M O M 0 0 0 0 o M o M
d: O rC? d: O r M d: O r co O T M It O r CO d'
r r r r N N N N M M CO M rr d' d' d' M Lo Lo LO O O O w ti r--
- r r r r r r r r r T T T T
CD M M r O ti d' d' O t- M N r M M M N M M M W M M r COI
N N N N N r r r r N CO "t d M M N N N r N N r r r
CD M CD CD Lo CD d' � N M d' O O d' CO 07 CO 00 M M O d' C` CD r r M M
r r r
M M d" M — N — M O N M M d' O LO M CD d' N N d' M LO d' r O N M
M LO N r d' d' CO N N r r M W M M M N d' r r M r N N O r r O
O m O Lo O Lo O Lo O Lo O Lo O Lo O m O m O m O w O LO O LO O In
'5' (P r M d O r M d: O r co d: O r M t1 O
r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r T T T T r r r r
r r. O Lo O M N I,- r d' M O Lo N M W r M W LO N N O O
It N It Lo N M N N N Lo M N co CD co N M (D O d' d' N d' O r r O O
o LO p LO O LO O Lo p LO o Lo o LO O M o LO O LO o LO o LO O LO O LO
O r M d O r M d' O r M d. O r M It O r M d' O T M d O r CO
r c- r r N N N CV M M M C�7 d' d' d' d' Lo to Lo Lo O CD tD LO t` ti N ti
r r r r r r r r T r r r r r r r r r r r T T T T r r r r
May 17, 2018
City of San Rafael
Planning Department, Attn: Steve Stafford
'1400 Fifth Ave.
San Rafael, CA 94901
RE: 1203-1211 Lincoln Avenue Proposed Assisted Living Facility
Dear Steve,
Geoff Forner of Monahan Pacific Corporation was so kind to show several of the residents at 820
Mission Ave, adjacent to the 1203-1211 Lincoln Ave parcel, the plans for the proposed Aegis Assisted
Living Facility. We were quite impressed with the attractive design and high quality architecture of the
project. The previous complex approved in 2006 would have resulted in a greater impact on traffic, since
it consisted of thirty-six condominium units. Geoff mentioned that the personnel shift changes at Aegis
would be at off-peak hours and that he expects that public transportation, so close to Mission and
Lincoln, would be used by many employees.
Several of the residents of 820 Mission Ave. plan to attend the Design Review Board hearing
at 7:00pm on June 5th at City Hall in order to acquire more details on the project, the concerns of the
Board and our neighbors, and to discover the proposed timeline of construction.
One of our residents, upon viewing the cover photo of the Assisted Living Project, noted that due to its
location, this iconic building would be a lovely gateway into San Rafael.
Sincerely,
FJ '
J
Ingrid L. Mueller, HOA President
820 Mission Ave, Apt. 2
�RFCEINMD
Mob
EXHIBIT 4
a.
EXHIBIT 5
LLJ
a.
EXHIBIT 5
�% vin Mal/ atn ux�dw� swlsnra-1
M `G N7dd(i �d'/7'�i'YI-1
y all'1 Ly.,�
Ll I i ❑---- O g
I
1 z
7
` 1
IANInb NIODNI7
w
:D _
LU O
><
CL
O
Z
O�
�L
III
❑N
r
e
^O
V
N t�CN
0
� LL¢ Q)
�LLLL W LL
NNN N
LL LLLL{LLLLL W W W W W
NN NN NN�/INNNN
BiDit ILNLL W
NNN NN
W W
NN
LL
% %
N NN NN
QMrn OOOlMlN�
J Q)
CZ5 Q)
Z
F-
rCn
G
NnO�Nry'rC�OrO'N7r
fQVMM MMMMtOoN aON'^b� mmHNOoOTt
1tV�OM7VOp NMn
VoOm'rrtlfh Qo0V�"0NN1
V) �O-1'
VmQ'm6mt
I�
Z
7
O.m �.KF
0] C]
O
0 tl
m
O
rN �
O�O
rrrrrriirr �
rQO
NNNNN �
MR
rN
J�++ O0
Z
V Q
'',gzO
N
O
N Nr�N
r�NN�Nn S�
mm
U�M1F' J
J Z
N
O
w
�F-U�F
M`�md'�.�--'N'�p�O
F"FN_- CCtI�`VUFQ-
NHZZEE ,
=.~
..—.
S� i
�•
'^ .N
a
zz�ap
O�UaF-
zzzzzzzzw�pO
7a»>707rt UI^
zzzzz_O
�»»OI-
zz�Gaazoo
a7¢V�rvWF-
u. ❑ vtLi .=
N
O
F-
C K
00
M5
O
V
z
W�Ov.o
z=r w
Cid
td
'p
00
O
°�
°
z z
O
~
a
LL
°
III
❑N
r
e
^O
V
0
� LL¢ Q)
Z)
ZtA
p a
U
Z
J Q)
CZ5 Q)
Z
rCn
G
W
��� � {
���
n
", m
O
.L
uj
z
LL
0
M
N
M
Q)
w
OZ
Z��
0.
z Zz
O
CL
In
u 5
u S
n
wo lei 01
Jill
ill - R
9
r
U
z
0
w
Ld
z
0
U
z
r
U)
J
o w
II ❑ v�
m
m
z
C4
0
LLI
Ld
Q
LU
I --
w
G
w
r r
o �
^®e
` 4
M
z
z< CO
z
U
C.
z
w
Me
0
Lu
!fid
8
v
o �
g �s
i @ b
9-00• - F—
CQ
Lul
21
uj
a
Q
I�
W
Na
LULU
��!Ii11�I�ii��P
•�
ad
a
Q
I�
W
Na
LULU
��!Ii11�I�ii��P
•�
k
WIWI
NIODNII
3�
SPflli:%J0w00 ',.(6V3AV 140152 06-0
(EF W W)-we4lo vdv
W
M
�bo-•�vE�0@,�
o�
, "
b
Qu
01 Ug
111 Nn
500
HIND
8'?6g�g€
wo o3rW
HIM
�L'trC_w= 3
4
L�2 swz -
'114
W
[ttl lW MINI WdO7 VL IILN[!b SflOPi/
mn t TIN.ySTiY�:WN?latiLShM4
SJ/10/C
,onii
'd'1'S2GNINVd 3nN3AV NIODNII E:OZI-
� a
NO{SVdGgAS wn{N{woaNOD WIMCBM
z
VWX 3AIlVIN31 DMISIA
(60 '80-6OKW Ndt9 3nN3AV N10JNI1 66Z6'£OZ6
w+sa u+*+a w"'na , �rA�w Nu e1N
LL
3
�'S{a
RR 33
49 Hapal
Wised d
�`
Na
o$4 0-9 �
1Lqu �cy����'
13
4 NOR!
•
��� w _ ���
_ _
�8
n
w_iX
yya
d��s�L3 2
:S a u J.b
''e[,.3„ <_•i u e-
x IN y
�o
V fit
lei Wc��t e
a oil 1
�
o - �5`
_��� =o
❑ _
a
moo_?F
�-
nI
K�� _� e o
lip! u -. ''<i
-_ �s
__ .. _
,.
�vo `-�'c.,
NN e
`3
aEk�r
NIODNII
3�
SPflli:%J0w00 ',.(6V3AV 140152 06-0
(EF W W)-we4lo vdv
W
M
�bo-•�vE�0@,�
o�
, "
b
Qu
01 Ug
111 Nn
500
HIND
8'?6g�g€
wo o3rW
HIM
�L'trC_w= 3
4
O
q�,
4
E
NIODNII
3�
SPflli:%J0w00 ',.(6V3AV 140152 06-0
(EF W W)-we4lo vdv
W
M
�bo-•�vE�0@,�
o�
, "
b
Qu
01 Ug
111 Nn
500
HIND
8'?6g�g€
wo o3rW
HIM
�L'trC_w= 3
z
t
V
Q
c
u
�o s c$
y N
�
"s
=
co
LU
O v • 8 G
12
Ill 13VJVli NVS:)SV
o i 'n
Si
8S�FaLL
® O
Q
LL
sUll
VE��
Noir
C'i
U
® �� • '3 �'3
I—
oN�eo<
L11
O
g
64546 H] 13tl3VN NVS 3f1N3Atl NOI5SIW 008
Co}Q
Sig
m
p ff
IAVd Ri NVS SOW
�
w
LU
z
t
V
Q
c
u
�o s c$
y N
�
W
=
tis '. ?e
o E
� P6 a W
Q 5'30
3 az
o i 'n
Si
8S�FaLL
os
o' W
sUll
VE��
Noir
U
I—
oN�eo<
O
n boa F< '8u8 j=
Co}Q
Sig
W
ZO
nx
W
-W� i
U
abww'wWW
E'. a
--�
Lnoo�'
0
E53zil
>
g <�FNgLtS a>oiWl r z�.o¢ N°u� 5
°
sgf�
5�33
� �d-agE�
3L=g
Euz
ow�izif�W�z10 g�mop 'z
g<
_
"d ZZmo9s=s°5
RRo o=ff°<„tt�� =Sig=sFm�
Zoo
�t��iNS'��ctSCo�¢r�z��ZZ
�¢i
•
o�oS�jGcu��
SJ"'�o°°�'^g6'FiC�~FO��S�I?
��iF”
aof<oU6WZ= zz�°�F €aOi'"
obi
z
U
��?��3oio poi
Woouayg�a�Fog of
ZQo
oo
VI
W
i oLL��� tt° ga��<�3z
❑
Z
a =� oC o 0 1�3�z11
Y o€9
VI
oV EE
Y°€}sa"off
o : Cm nh10 og gm
m
�a
�
z
t
V
Q
c
u
�o s c$
y N
cLL
C
tis '. ?e
o E
� P6 a W
C
3 az
o i 'n
Si
mo o E a
�5 i'o C
r 3IL Ii < m
os
o' W
O
U
I—
O
z
t
3
cLL
8g
z
5 9zy
�g
tiFra
LL
O
d
mo o E a
�5 i'o C
r 3IL Ii < m
s
� g�^ oxo oxo
t mfr m�A 9 A R
s
t m n
EXHIBIT 6
Q
I
Q
o
0
W
I
O_
.t -AL I
s
Z.
A•F£ A -LE
LU
V)
br
I
O U G
D1113V3Vd NVS DSV
p
I^
Q
Q
o r
o
LL00
,
Q
uV
hm n z
<
Z z 3 z a < 3 @ c
64546 VD 13VJWJ NVS 3nN3AV NOISSIN 008
I�I_I z
N
_
O Asa _
11V3Vd NVS SI93V
o
o
W
°
�{ LJ
— ------------------
U mae r3e _ e`
1.
__j
J a
0
oa
Q
I
Q
o
0
o
I
A -J 1
.t -AL I
d -GE
A•F£ A -LE
� A.BL
I
p
I^
i
a
,
uv u I
--
�{ LJ
— ------------------
1.
co.-AcT CCMPACr
SAT
--
3
My
31
-- m - -- m - -- n - ----_;
1 I 1
b
-
'
A•lE
//
d•.92
A•AE i
A9L
\\ A•J,
I
II
I
I
I
I
�
' °a
I
I
�j
�
to
I
f
I
L-od LJ'
j
i
I
I
I
Ik
I
,t
_q,
R
I
I
I ml
f ^II
II
1
I
A-92
I , A•At A-21 \ d
-N
III AAI
I I
�
-9
i
>r
1
1
I
t
,lam ,w.1 % 02
i z
\
�
J
w
-
I
__._—__---..—_—_—_----
I
J'm
i
1
J
Wb
Wm
w
,. ley ue Lou9uwe�ey ees swav-tLotL9u�uAo,yuay
E:_
o
O
z
L
53Itl3M30/dRMJId
_
j
2
-�
J
LU
o
Cr
w E"'
V
_ - c -
• _ all 13VAVU NVS SSV
o
o-
Q
o r
11
I -
i77 -
I
w
1'
n..
VD NVS 3nN3AV NOISSIW 008
o
xN
ry
6tS176 13V3VN
z
U i
Ii7/ r 'r•-• t l U i i 3 I\ I "� _--_____
'�
O
iX YIN R 13d3V2l N`dS SI93V
56
O 3AV NIO::)NII O O
O
I
53Itl3M30/dRMJId
_
j
-----
-�
`
I
-7
i77 -
I
1'
I
ol
xN
b
-_—_____il•
U i
Ii7/ r 'r•-• t l U i i 3 I\ I "� _--_____
'�
LL
\\\ '>j `( �� '\ �I — •-♦`. —L— --�` etc z'.
I 1 F- I ( a I
a
66 n.
we wLL
JL
�Q
1 I
/ / Iv 11 _-_ - - C•
\ / / ��' a ✓:'\\'• 1 ' I 1. ' b I
I:
- - "
NtlA
LL �I
IZ
I b�
ol
Ln
.-
1
1 I =11 I
111=1 I f—
WY OSStFtt Bl/1U41lS '
L JL JL JI
4 _�lavia/xmu_ I ' 1 t
st d t T.
_ z 333
=1
I I
_--- 1 1 IYp9t •
a
Lu
III=1 � I -J I— I_ITI-LI l�l I Int S I I I� I I I I-1 I �lll— I =1 I I l=1
-1 I
I I► E I [;E-11 F.Eii 11 111=71 1 LU
J
1 I r
I
j
-----
I
jl
I
1'
I
ol
xN
I
WV
I
�.--
7
1{
_
_fi�e�n\\•
L
j �
�I
--�r-irv� i
J,.�
•j
1 I =11 I
111=1 I f—
WY OSStFtt Bl/1U41lS '
L JL JL JI
4 _�lavia/xmu_ I ' 1 t
st d t T.
_ z 333
=1
I I
_--- 1 1 IYp9t •
a
Lu
III=1 � I -J I— I_ITI-LI l�l I Int S I I I� I I I I-1 I �lll— I =1 I I l=1
-1 I
I I► E I [;E-11 F.Eii 11 111=71 1 LU
J
1 I r
p i r
p u
D11 13VJVa NVS DSV
a:
00
cn
3 0 0 <3 $ @ V
6b546 VJ l3VjV21 NVS 3f1N3AV NOtSSIW 008
m
o
z
p t; =g
t;
I]VdV 1 NVS SI93`d
o
� w
10
1 w
,�;
t E2
a 2 111
----------
,
a
!, -------------- ------------
T
-------- -------------- _ — _ —_ _
\\ I r-----------� ,---{----------�-- ---_ - --%
--
----------- L -----------'---L------- g
l�y�\
, N o
�` I I •. � II J
i
All
1nA W it
) I _ _ G z
TMIMT—
I
r `I \ t , 1
3
I � 0 r
F
--
I
1 3 3 3 3 S F I 1 1
I---_
Ou,
" - I o ( I I I I I i
--------------� , 1
1 bt i —i—
ti
f ' c-� �I 1
C
1' � -
Qo
I 1 o nP`
I ,
1 1 I
t I 1 1
I I
'v
n I iOln iiI Imo! I t/,1 t t z
w
1 7 ^ha I
w
4
- W
„ u, , e,ea ue s, .rurouauW eea ues s; +r-uou>utsu o+a wa to
49tl 15A6tt aL0U>l/5
o
�J
L:J LJ
1
i
J1
i
r - —� ---- --- - —
I
,
1
4 u
I
I I r
----------fi
i
8 U
. Fl G
71113Y=lYd NVS DSV
I
J li__------____ - -�
OO J
Q
M
LL
e E
=
E I
LL Q
-
i
V)
a g o <3 S o
6tiSti6 VD 13VJVH NVS 3nN3AV NOISSIW 008
LU
O
oo
C
O
� _
33VJVt i MVS SIDIV
o
u W
w
u
mai ��"
vWi
`o
l;J
�J
L:J LJ
1
i
J1
i
r - —� ---- --- - —
I
,
1
4 u
I
I I r
----------fi
i
1
_----------1------------T—__�___----
I
J li__------____ - -�
1 1
^ I
E I
i
o__
ci
I]
Vw
-
g i
I) 4
'� p
h
-j
g
I
zI
a
�
,
W
--------------`;
— —
77
10
�I
z
Q
o_
LU
W
m
J
W
LU
W
—I
r
O
-01
0_.
r
J
w
=o
j
s
I
I
L/I
O U "��
[ I
I
Dll 13V3V8 NVS DSV
o
m —I
J
Q
o
LL=
e
' r--------------�
l_
W
I r
O Q
1
_ e
O
o
O •
` 12-�3
amLLI
IL z
m
7`
o o yJ 3a
6bSb6 VD 13V3V8 NVS 3nN3AV NOISSIW 008
<
�
p
?
N '
O
C?
13VJVd NVS S193V
a
,
= W
W
Z
I
j
-01
0_.
r
0-
j
I
I
I i
_------
[ I
I
r
f2
-
�/m�}
0o
r ------------L
ri------------' - !---L--------K
I I
' r--------------�
l_
W
I r
1
, I
,
_
I
j
o
I
1-110
I
11
17
�I
a
�
---- I
L--------- 1--
_
'O
-----
— — --- I
20.
' I
— -- — —,
a o
I
11
L r��
_EZJ
tI
i
_r
I
i 1
r
o
---
— _ — _ 1
-----=----------
[
-
� w
{
r
wa
J
i
w � i.wen� r -c�ac,ru xw^n
�>:s� r-ct cwc isuao�n,+�n
V
4:
o
�o
s
LU
Ln
t�
U
o m
Ill 13VAVd NVS DSV
Q
gn
LL
H
z
Q
r
r
a g
to
o oe a „
!3Z -os
6bSbVD INAW NVS 3nN3AV NOISSIW 008
<
LL
13VAVl MVS SIJ3V
z
°V)Un
o
W
I
CL,
��;
00
El
O
C—
I/ ■■■r■ mumu■ �--- - _
r•---
MOM
•---
•---
IME
> 1m■■■■ ■.■■ t.■..
■uul mumu. ■ ' .;.I' �r■■■
..... ..... o� -AN
' lum■
Z 71i AME
■r■!= mumu_ ■rr■e 1■■■■
mumu_ mumu_ ■■.■_ ���,..� I■■■■
■r■!= r■■■= mumu= I... 1■■■■
mumu _ mumu= ■.■■= �} SII 7
;�....I I■O■■ ■■■_ mumu_ mumu■
I.M.
u■.. ■uu
sur■ u■u 'i,
�a .mumu
i, + mumu■ ■■r■■
sur■■mumu■
..�.�I. .i !-'� ', uu■ uu■ it
,..�._� u■■■ + ■rrr■ ■u■■ NONE■ ( _,
mumu■ sou uu■
.,.i'i:. +� r '; mumu■ !I rrr■
..0 — ' t':mumu■I ■■■■I
+ � .mmu � � ■m.m■ � ■■Ori
.mums ■■.■■
'SOME .mumu ■■.■ mumu■ 1,
a,i,.,, ;!♦ mumu■ :mumu mumu■ �"i�.
tl' nrr■ ■.■ ■m■■■ ■u■■ I� tJ^��
ii1�il�; lust■ uu.m■ uu■ uru■ 1 1':� L.i�
i'w uru■ :u■■ �■u■= -
!momnom-
fru= uru■ ■ i
�u■= ■rrr. -J `I
No
dor= la
mom:;
I
s
t �
pm
MEN mL -v
iG
sur■ sur.
uruWE
sur■ J ���.
ry
■u■u ■u■. _ ���-
■rrr■ uru.
uor uu.
um= uo.
um= uru■
:■■■_ mumu_ ■■...
■■■- mumu_ mumu.
loom ..... .....
..... ..... ...
I I
i I ISI I
- �
_ I I
I
I I I
RA
'I � �,,
I I
I 1
1
I I
I i I I
I I I I
9•Zl
I 1 I
I I
I
III I I I IY
Of
J I 1 I U
LU
z 1 II I I I
O Q
II I I w
LU
Lna I I I I I I o0
P � III I I I i I z m
we la /xa �e YLl'OLI�LLVa Jetl yes s. ay'LLilCl6L 4\i}�a,wdiyan ��
LYv K�:4t l a l0U>LIS
O
s
co
O v
o
»1-13VIVaNVSDSV
¢
p�
LL. O
a
I a -
so
z
ck� o
o
I a
N
z
8
;�n�
6bSv6 V7 �3V3VN NVS 3nN3AV NOISSIN 008
�'
O
§ G<
�3VJ" NVS SIJ3V
o
X -j
w
U
o_
w w
of
0`0
I I
i I ISI I
- �
_ I I
I
I I I
RA
'I � �,,
I I
I 1
1
I I
I i I I
I I I I
9•Zl
I 1 I
I I
I
III I I I IY
Of
J I 1 I U
LU
z 1 II I I I
O Q
II I I w
LU
Lna I I I I I I o0
P � III I I I i I z m
we la /xa �e YLl'OLI�LLVa Jetl yes s. ay'LLilCl6L 4\i}�a,wdiyan ��
LYv K�:4t l a l0U>LIS
z
I—
OLLJ
ea
c
tIq
O
c�
o
o m
Dll 13VJV8 NVS DSV
a
Q
s
LL ?
i� 3
+
0
N
P
boa
6VS46 VD 13VAVU NVS 3nN3AV NOISSM 008
�
o '
z
oi
a °
e
13VJ" MVS SI93`V
C
`;
LU
Ln
v
m25 tag o�
It
I I
V)
o0
Ia
I
f
I I
I
oW6�1
a•
LEE
I
I
EN
j
9
I
I
i
I
1
'
I
I
Elf
I
!
1
EJSEN EM3
i
I
I
I
�
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
,
I
'
I
I
I
I
!
�
/
O
O
I
\
w
LUI
I
I I I
W
z
'I
z
I1
a-a� A lA .G•Ats1 A-.«
z
o
J o
'
1
D o
_j b
I
De
c
m
I
I I
00`
m
it . fi.
1�fi•6
p
fi.
n 9-
i
Zd'° Zjlm
I
I �
—
I
I
I
�
I �
�
'J
z_
I ,
Y
tY
I
Q
I
a
]I
I
I
I
z
q
SIILU
I
I I
J a
I Y
m
YIY VSSRI L B40L91/5
-
W-1 , gey.e I r � LVLWe�en
ee, sl ruroLIVMR7 oaw9V
0
W
=
s
p
c�
O U
o 8
D1113V3V21 NVS DSV
7
Q
c -
LL O
d e
f
tn,n<'^
/ t� i
30 3�
6bS46 VD 13V3Vd NVS 3nN3AV NOISStW 008
p
o
��_ z
n
I]Vd d MVS SIJ3`V
o
W
W
V
moo 000
00
a -sr
a•at a-oI a-aI yya,,•at a -,u
a--�-u-----1----I- �c
,
g
III p
U
LU
i S I -L (A
J3 l" J_
I I •y"� I
I II I I I 1 I I
N
z
Z
� U
Of
m
LL
btila
y.iLLL�
u
1 u N
YYY I F-' O
Lr) V
A
ORTIii i
/ Z
I
D
I
N v I.tt
V
1
!' Z
aF J
i, RSE - F
LU
co
LK
R
_ I w
I F-
I�
J
F-
J _ O
� d �
� W
O J
o _
m
Z N
d
O
J
O
U I
J W
d p
cc O
W �
� — W
F
Z
cm
m
., �,e I n e I i-oti>t�u+ven yes Y-LI�ULtILltsi� �d!�n 47
WVLS96 Slomi 5
I�Fre 1 ,I
4 t 9 I f.I
Q t
� I
,OL) 3r1N3AV N10ON11
\ ?R
RR
04 ❑3 :M✓a \_�cc
nT_7
margo fail zi 7
r , r-- -
1
m,
,05
Z.0{�
o �a �`, b I i 11 1 i t 'mq I 1' • �'
o I I
-- J I I z { I t I I I I
I 1 I 1
- --- -- ---- J
\ I n m I
\ I 1 f o I I I
I L,
1 I E I 1 I
gm
_ tar z.
M M1.sts
I I -- ---J q
L
o el 1 0 1 t� I
rW
�0. � I L ! �� f i i E �I•.
f• -- ---I I > o i I
m i I
g II t--------ox�--- i
- 3 �
I r I I
L+
L — -----------------------
— f
am �t —_ -- - ----- - -=-
i.
-—[iy (ta) rasave 3zcatrt c �neu o� \
F
8
I
o
W i W ti ZiOng�
Z wp
W
m
K
w'�� e 3
.011
13V3V8 NVS OSV
0 o
N<
cu *
W
rn
`°
O
O
F 9
i -' •
pWom
oy��.
goJ 4<
?
F¢-
(n
cc «= �S -
6ti4ti6
VO 13VJVN NVS `3nN3AV NOISSIW 008
�„2\
a
''ua„
�
cn
m
U
Z
rca
3e m
C 3z 3
v
w
o♦
rt5`
13VJVN NVS Sl
o
�
�
Ld
o
oo
C>
mannw o
s
(n
I�Fre 1 ,I
4 t 9 I f.I
Q t
� I
,OL) 3r1N3AV N10ON11
\ ?R
RR
04 ❑3 :M✓a \_�cc
nT_7
margo fail zi 7
r , r-- -
1
m,
,05
Z.0{�
o �a �`, b I i 11 1 i t 'mq I 1' • �'
o I I
-- J I I z { I t I I I I
I 1 I 1
- --- -- ---- J
\ I n m I
\ I 1 f o I I I
I L,
1 I E I 1 I
gm
_ tar z.
M M1.sts
I I -- ---J q
L
o el 1 0 1 t� I
rW
�0. � I L ! �� f i i E �I•.
f• -- ---I I > o i I
m i I
g II t--------ox�--- i
- 3 �
I r I I
L+
L — -----------------------
— f
am �t —_ -- - ----- - -=-
i.
-—[iy (ta) rasave 3zcatrt c �neu o� \
F
8
I
o
W i W ti ZiOng�
Z wp
2f LL,M
a
jr
F
HiL
c`4
W
LL.
L] i O
�� a�,gyF
Nb°�,y
2
OZO
W I N
�y V5
W
a
J I m
w1Lu
€a
ry h 0
92 Z
F 9
--------------------------
9 q
`X�X3I .•• I
Wpl I 6K
z I Bio I
i !
K
w
z
w
Z
O
rn
no
Z
>
F
F -
W
g
ry_U
_
a
o
e t d - s
F' -
oil
33V3V2J NVS DSV
�o
LL<
W
o
>K<`�
�,��E4 *
"o- Q
o
Q Q
U)
Q
��
�
O
OU
o
`� "%
e-
H �;i - -
wns
Nom`
�V z
V
a 4`
WJ
m•-
na0
�.'
O� oA W o m
WON
"� �� Sa +Cede
3-
i
6ti4-b6
'3nN3AV
m
m
�J
+� LL
��ssra'r
ZQ�
m
N
r -
U
(n
Z
o o 3 0 a n
e
W-
e
VO 13VJVZI NVS NOISSINI 008
c o
m m
t
p Z I—
g
za
O
�oY o
� W #
WAV 1 NVS S13:1V
U
_ ori
„a ra
s`
o
�o
j_ my
?5 3f1N3nV NIOONiI °
S y
® ssss
S C ZZUm2
w Y❑ SS ❑❑
ii
`JC S5
o \ N °�'o �yI (snt son ca laoro 6y� 66y;yyy ; E ss
pp ss
Pilo Pito `'Uv6Sm-° I p❑ z KI \�o=g F�
5� ti rqi Y ��m m
m "
_❑ n� 3d m VIA �Ra �I � R.M. r
xtvnaatsC�� _ '�dw arm Li_OLLK
ptwxpdrmo 81Na
6 � m � t'�� - -rte ..- - ``P1p _ F •-:)
- g� '-- - - wl�t 1 •' /.vse I `.sets - �pna.e � --- -- +d ra
Ve m I 1F�dIF�I I w �jwz z^ c m f g 3dvosptm .. }m��n mMwamrvtnR __ +'•i;� ..� `�,
-----------
S
••'°` fi q M \ hM1 Mq>a11V131likt D LL: Di mle�i �Lf aDt q � +•
o- .. / I ❑ >
----------- ', I,,�, �-n cuss '-� -•I S j sa '�. - r - $
1 - ---i� � _.•� 3 rnss 12 f I '{,�/�{, I-_-'---9--_-_ vam _- �_� 1 F
❑
IS I
=
:gE9 i t �w o< C{y`• 1 y II 5 'Qi 3373 N
m m € a ! go
I �` II 1111 � �� � I �<❑9•" ITL --i-- --- I � `+� ^M1
g 1 1 II 1 1 II t�'• I ��� I L_-.�._ n_ I � ak� 1 `�
I t ' ♦__ 11 I i
It I '•JLLmt• I t -•, II @
�, r I'•. ca t
L= JL I 1 4{J 03 i 1Q�<
1.! a��€ I I~ W pI
� i� \t` I l�� yy ,`z °'1 i I l•, sr i ��o�� •' �� � 1 1 '.g:. � ��e �
el x�`. •< 2oRI i I• I I aOzg29
21
z'�pi `•rl I 1 I
q ' 4 I' y 66r -pp 1 I ' ' { �3� a� I e� 1 •t MOB p
tel.,<f'`iI •g, j�' �• I I I E _L g'om
�ma�
-_
I fir'-❑wm o-�o --- ----JJ i i I or 1 � j p I •'. � >�� W
i I I ,�'•I I •I I:h' Z
0 1 I 1 I'• I I I� - . �'� W
�z � 1 ,•, j � i � I �,, III � Z
lo
we
RO
T3
5
----- -- -� i F hey
I !: ''t 1 \ t •.j 1 np SII -:
f
` u
Qffi
I t
•. w
' I 1 .
z
_
- ---- - - -�_' - - -" - - - - - : ;'-Tai:. -----� � r----- -- -_ E{-'_1 � - Fl �`� •:z �
p I •><r
- ♦ o I t I '�
o S 1 i ,t LL t
m
rd5 `oto Z � u 3 i �� �� � � � m �rc i n � �� I•`` ,1!-' �• 1
tVn
° t a o 0 o LL
_ o a o o z d
p mr-r rt•Jm ��S3 q' •...::Oj 1 �- 1 I ;`�;r �� � � e ❑
3 ;:. 1 I I II I lo:
w
mo
-i, m _
z z
N J p 'n
--- ---fid -- I II I °no
pow 11 s.
❑ i
� H
�4nq�QpZ I I 9/2a
O B LL 01 O I '
ii LL o ❑ ° I
_ --,,., r.,• I ° ° 1 ° II`smr65
p p 3t3 _
i i'LL 0. 9 �LL S3F ma _
a I IL
o
\ � a
Li
Q ~
odo2zoo o
�LLLLLLoo m j g t �° yy
03�^
Z LL ��S
O =�9
cio.
p
at-�¢$m 3�Fr°mo`
Tom, W
�KozF 88 p
- p
m
= 0. '
m z
m 2<3�m�soOw6'o �s ioLL34�'�
y I '
1 I •awo«,o}o
d - -L
90:65• Bt0 LZ Z
\
2
O
Oil
S ¥
"
�.
� <
u
m
[/»!Z-
O
�§kj
■-
3 k
\\®
\
U
w
\ ■` �! :
°� ®
m \;_
_�_
2;
e9a
\ §\ m
& o
5
e
C 2
2�°
4 « «�° a
`!; #� ®
e �_ |
{ `
®! | `'� !
q QwR «s' gq m7m 2e
a'��
!
» z
®
c
a
||
.,
U
2
c ;tee ■a,
\7§(
g |
]]VjV6 NVS SI9]V
.o z
I
;|22ae�
_
|
.
\ \
U
,o;
o�
F
�z
D yj
9�
g
O
ado
p
i -
Oil
13VAVH
g 8o
J
W
U)
.1 0
'
FLL^' f 00N YpZ
zC
sq W- �a
I{
iLL
'go
0
t
EO
(�
`O
o$CO2
8
2
o r
�aa*
CO
00
N
g U
z
o
�
¢ =
W :
�3` JV` J NVS S103V
Y�
A~
o Oz
w
�
a
Z
U
Sao oh o
z lie
E
to U Q
oo
o�
F
�z
D yj
9�
m U52k <o
e --2
k
o
�yu� °pgSgSS�zz� gg �ry5
o u oppDi�eegoi Uw9w�
FLL^' f 00N YpZ
iLL
lWl
KW G<
K
gym=
�w
m
3< D a
W
0
•,t•
1 �
w�IS
a
m o
•za
J
y
�
a
Z
o
< z
z lie
O
m
d
M-78OLaL
N
m
yuroumrPoyo
-
o_
a
W
o
z
ww
w
a
G�
O
00
LL as
m;
I Ww
< Q
Jll 13V3V21 NVS JS/
o
Q
0 Y
7F F
gada`VU
J
W
z'
_
Q�www
e
G
D109300
�N¢¢Na¢ fU¢¢q
3oeo �o gg f
N �.�o�_n3
64546 VD 13V3Va NVS 3nN3AV NOISSIW 008
�
N
F Z
W
in
o
N
a
s
o
a =In g
�1VAV2J NVS Sl0�d
o
?S
_ ¢
W
��
U
mgo„o o"<e
1
p'
n 0
I I I
30
N
1
ez
V-
0
�0
z
ww
w
00
LL as
m;
I Ww
< Q
0 Y
7F F
gada`VU
J
Q�www
h
G
D109300
�N¢¢Na¢ fU¢¢q
JQ
U
N
}
W
J LLZzz
J J J
D
?S
N
1
p'
y I
oY ni I
I I I
—I
N
1
of
N
O
0 3nN3AY NwaNn
-----------
7
U
Zvi
7
-
-�1• 1
I
I
I
�
xK
i
�� �II
� I I
kO - - � � x %„s1'
k __ � � x
x•x
�%%O
x`%x ��� :.I '.
x %Ox
%xx%% -_--
__ _
-#�.
_}••
• 1 , .. I
I
L _k
Ob
t
cl(l
( I
I
♦
I
I
i
I
# a
I I
II
i
1
tt z
(
-
O
,
I I
I
( I
II
II
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I I I
I
}
♦ • I 1
1
( I
_____ ❑
___
I
I
W N
w to C7 �
—__
(
"_�..,•�.. -��-
�I
5f
I li ii
Li
I ii
u
I
p� I
I
••} I
N a
Opo IZ
SUmW
w
a
W�ia
LLI
I 1
I
(
I
I
1
I
I
zQVUV
1
ypzzz
I
I 0
Z1
g
W
7
93
W o
IL JL JL JI
1
1
1
I
�
~O O
WOF
I 1
�;•
I
1
11 I
0a
I
a0
.60
I
I
1
i I
I
1
I
I Z
WE
yO
I I
I I
I
II
I'
I
I
I
I
I�
(90
z_
a
CC M
0
Wd V4 S Bl ULUi
1 1
I,
I
I
I
0
O
wwW
zwuj
o N
Z�oi
o
z
Nt8E;
138
0
3
rho„d H md�
c d=n `y%
H o
~• a
o
® ' `a e - e
Dll 13vi" NVS DSV
o
O
3
J
w
E
Z
cmc@` c KnecEi cTmc$E
a
Fav
=
m
o
m o o m
c j IEe
c E -
w
E
c°
E n U m m a E°" m
avcE
m 3
X59
°
0 t7
9 ^
m3mn 3n3
`L"3a °z mn9�
racy
a3m
z
w
2 E -1. $€�@ °9 ni.=o.3-mc
°'c�=m
m3m oDE �mE L ann 0o
°
Son
N °
5
64S66 VD l3V�VH NVS 3(1N3AV NOISSIW 008
0
no nu
-'
d U
� (�
CIO
N
O
$
TIVAV2J N`dS SIC
m m n e, "a�- mv-S E 3nE� }°a=
o"o
�i°•a
=
W
mo
o m
O u
ILI
°amc��`o cmcc Naoc wf °m°
E
-.2 E 9EAu cm Qcm� c
NE
°e ° vv�3 '"' °a aUa°D `°o.nm v`o�mae
v3 Fe �r Eom m�'m@ ma•G$
$�8m
�A 1
ter• � ,;�_
} 1 0
Li H7j:-V
U 1
LU
z
w
Ut
z
Nt8E;
138
0
3
rho„d H md�
c d=n `y%
H o
ed� 3Wrao=
O
3
J
w
E
°
cmc@` c KnecEi cTmc$E
- o a€ vpj°@ aE - °” 3�
Fav
W w
$
o
m o o m
c j IEe
c E -
w
E
c°
E n U m m a E°" m
avcE
m 3
X59
c
m3mn 3n3
`L"3a °z mn9�
racy
a3m
z
w
2 E -1. $€�@ °9 ni.=o.3-mc
°'c�=m
m3m oDE �mE L ann 0o
°
Son
m
scat<rn m 10a=$ tv=E
c r mNd m�mE tgc $^ on=
c3$aa $ $m
no nu
-'
`o
n SES Nag 3� mEo� `_c � $5 n-
o on nEm$
a�•cc - -
O
$
m $r3�o
$-'•oSNc
m m n e, "a�- mv-S E 3nE� }°a=
o"o
�i°•a
i
3
';" z`o m a c a u§ E$ o c oas 9% m w m
rn m e baa m E= n. fl- mF-r�° m m EiY-`n
y m y W$ o= n w m m m
@ mII s Wim!'¢ o8c cg m
24
o m
O u
ILI
°amc��`o cmcc Naoc wf °m°
E
-.2 E 9EAu cm Qcm� c
NE
°e ° vv�3 '"' °a aUa°D `°o.nm v`o�mae
v3 Fe �r Eom m�'m@ ma•G$
$�8m
Z
m�
ons -U
m v�uo t9 'c m$ rng�$ rn�oa°°o
o. A,
6
®d° �=@m =t='mo - 2e�" ale
vy=o
W W
nh
L�a°o$ a$ muE°3 .-..cam La°mmam
"°9 v tEo ommm Ho�3� Tmn ❑ma
O@En
N
m n
Em m
�5d O
mu'cE
N m
'a0 tN
iV iV
m@ca
E@- miymE=q
¢ 93 ¢`c_c xwm
2 x_ mnm-� mmcm .tc
E.-= _
¢Sa rn ��.t"°. a6E0 a¢ama He F-��» aE.�
cc 3
ao.m
IL
°i 'i ui
U d
�A 1
ter• � ,;�_
} 1 0
Li H7j:-V
U 1
LU
z
w
Ut
z
0
O
3
J
w
E
ug 3
w w'
>
3
W w
3 w
3 t9i
w w
w
E
a
z
w
O
0
5
'Wmz
Z
zzWz
w
w
N
m
O
O O
W K
W K
�"�,cfm>c��'�
m
W WOf
W
W W
z
i
N
m n
iV tY
N m
'a0 tN
iV iV
is N
_
O
�
U d
a
OOw
q'°q:omg3go`°
q4
i7
(7 Y
4
W
N
N
(g
m
N
X X
m m
iv
JJ JJ
6¢
O O
6 Q
-
JJ
6 6
Q 6
<
- U'
4 Q
U'
— �- N
k
Z
4
-
Za
Z0
f
F
0 LuN
O Op
J
J
K
7
}
K ZO
W 0
d
w
N
Ir
y
W
?
<
z
mmcmwLLPF�F.x000
0
N w
m�<
'>°
,>�
w
u z
0,
¢
0
v
Z
d
�c¢fc=i
K W
z<z ?
W
< W
omr�nc�mo>uaCf
J W
< J
z J
¢
Z
Z
O 00
(�7mx
0
iu
C¢7
93
w
m
z
uZ7
>
Z m
W N
a W
Z
K<y
��..
E S<
7
a > O>
LL U
z O
Z<Z
z¢
S X
z
Q
Z
m w
W
d
W
w
.I
G
y
Z
(<7 0
a J
W>
R<
dp KK
y
7
'
<
J
z
W
w a
N
7
W
F-
4
i
W Q
_
d a
H�(
W
j
m 0
Z W
2<�
0 0
D O
wO
3 .J
z m
0 0
O J
w
0 0<
O S
J d
d
W
O
fWm
W
Vm
U
W
Z
Z
W >
-U'
p
Z
5
J
a'
mm
G
wrc m
F 7
O O
a a
.
X K
m 6
O
0 p
m 7
F Z
0 0
0-
�A 1
ter• � ,;�_
} 1 0
Li H7j:-V
U 1
LU
z
w
Ut
^� r 3
LZi o L9
Gib
ZJ w 1. m rg`Z
moo w� LLo w� m QI i<Z r NQ¢
W
U�NSZ 00 '�O It6 Z Z m 9 UJ �U
WWSrO j �~r ZGn Z In �, C 0h ¢KU
�H� Z a_ W I
II I I
Lu III I I II
p II I I Z
ZcoI
O /—
( III O
00 Z
TT
I I Z
Q
a
LLI
n—I
�wQ 5 W Ww r Qm
ZZSNC � O 16/1 d KS � �
2W 00 w NtO. W Z Ww
ZZII�3ros
� d
0 ,J v ANN
e �nd3a' •wry o
W z �QBG
o a
Z
a e e
Z O wQ Q
O O
Ns p
w� Z
z e O W=
W mo a sh��as O �'Wc5 Q
LU ? WOFOj
Q Q [e �• o
T3 o > m a c.. to P�e��G'P O o w .Z¢_I o
y _
N
Lim
sm b w
Q O Q
S Z
00
mg� p
.�5 vot'Q` Ur
� Z
0
arm
U V j Q
O
�j o CL
z"I�t3n 3o m
ME
IMM
z
we � y tl�e YLt Ll9LlV yea ue ! y- G4>L �d
WE 54 � BIOLL
O
C
u
ea"e^g
D1113V3V'dNVSJSV
z J
LU
Lfl
Q
a�
LL
0 3
0 2 '3 4- e
LU
—i
o
vr� '-.'a
6bS46 VD 13VIV NVS 3nN3AV N107N11 £OZL
HQJ Lu
�✓
i a o 3 n g a e
N 3 N p]
o
w
�3bAb�J NbS SIO.
o
=
W
o
lw
(Aoo
^� r 3
LZi o L9
Gib
ZJ w 1. m rg`Z
moo w� LLo w� m QI i<Z r NQ¢
W
U�NSZ 00 '�O It6 Z Z m 9 UJ �U
WWSrO j �~r ZGn Z In �, C 0h ¢KU
�H� Z a_ W I
II I I
Lu III I I II
p II I I Z
ZcoI
O /—
( III O
00 Z
TT
I I Z
Q
a
LLI
n—I
�wQ 5 W Ww r Qm
ZZSNC � O 16/1 d KS � �
2W 00 w NtO. W Z Ww
ZZII�3ros
� d
0 ,J v ANN
e �nd3a' •wry o
W z �QBG
o a
Z
a e e
Z O wQ Q
O O
Ns p
w� Z
z e O W=
W mo a sh��as O �'Wc5 Q
LU ? WOFOj
Q Q [e �• o
T3 o > m a c.. to P�e��G'P O o w .Z¢_I o
y _
N
Lim
sm b w
Q O Q
S Z
00
mg� p
.�5 vot'Q` Ur
� Z
0
arm
U V j Q
O
�j o CL
z"I�t3n 3o m
ME
IMM
z
we � y tl�e YLt Ll9LlV yea ue ! y- G4>L �d
WE 54 � BIOLL