Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRB 2019-08-06 #2REPORT TO DESIGN REVIEW BOARD SUBJECT: 350 Merrydale/3833 Redwood Hwy— Environmental Design Review Permit for redevelopment of the existing site with 45 "for -sale" townhome units with garages; APN(s): 179-041-27, 179-041-28; Planned Development PD(1594) Zoning District; Michael Hooper, applicant; Francine Clayton for Ridgewood Properties, owner; San Rafael Meadows Neighborhood. PROPERTYFACTS Location General Plan Designation Zoning Designation Existing Land -Use Project Site: GC (General Commercial) PD(1594) School North: LI/O (Light Industrial/Office) PD(1436) Public Storage South: GC/HDR HR1/GC Retail, Restaurant, residential East: N/A (Hwy 10 1) N/A State Highway West: LDR R7.5 (Single Family) Residential Lot Size Lot Coverage (Max.) Required: 2.5 acres (PD minimum) Standard: 60% (HR1 standard) Proposed: existing 2.28 gross acres (99,150 sf) Proposed: 34.5% (34,206 sf) Height Residential Density Allowed: 36' Allowed: 15-32 units/gross acre = 34-72 units Proposed: 33.5' Proposed: 19 units/gross acres = 45 units Parking Upper Floor Area (Non -hillside residential) Required: City Code: 90 (45 covered)/State Allowed: N/A Concessions (94, uncovered and tandem Proposed: N/A OK) Proposed: 94 (71 two -car garage, 20 two -car tandem, 3 one -car) plus 7 uncovered on -street spaces Min. Lot Width (New lots) Setbacks Required: N/A Required* Existing Proposed (HR1) Proposed: N/A Front: 15 N/A- existing 15' Side(s): 5 buildings to be 7'2"-77' Outdoor Area OR Landscape Area Ped. side: NIA demolished 23' Bldg. sep: N/A 30' Required: 50% front yard (3,848 sf) Rear: 5 31.8' Proposed: 55% (2,093 sf) plus private patios, community building, common courtyard, creek promenade Grading Tree Removal Total: cut: 7,500 CY Total (No./S pecies): 28 (Rewood, Oak, Sweet Gum, Crape Myrtle, fill: 12,000 CY Pine Juniper, Maple, Ornamental Pear/Cherry off -haul: 2,000 CY Requirement: NIA Proposed: 63 trees * The setbacks shown would be "required" for an HR -1 (High Density Residential) Zoning District. However, the applicant is proposing to rezone the site to a new PD, not an HR -1 Zoning District. The proposed development approximates the design/scale of the adjacent properties (apartments) along the east side of Merrydale Road, which are in an HR -1 Zoning District and as such, staff recommended the proposed project follow the HR -1 development standards. See further discussion on PD rezoning on Page 7. SUMMARY The proposed project is being referred to the Design Review Board (Board) for review of a proposed 45 -unit "for -sale" townhome development with new landscaping and creekside. enhancements at 350 Merrydale/3833 Redwood Hwy (see Exhibit 1: Project Vicinity Map). The project proposes to demolish the existing one-story buildings on the site and to construct nine (9) three=story-buildings with a total of 45 townhome units (a mixture of two-bedroom, three-bedroom and four-bedroom units) with garages and uncovered parking. The project would provide 20% of the units as affordable (a of total 9 below- market -rate (BMR) units), in compliance with San Rafael Municipal Code (SRMC) Section 14.16.030, thus qualifying for a State Density Bonus and "concessions" to certain development standards (e.g., parking, lot coverage, yard setbacks), as detailed in SRMC Section 14.16.360.H.3.a. The development qualifies for one concession and is requesting to use this concession for tandem parking/uncovered parking on the project site (see Chapter 18 parking discussion on Page 8 of this staff report). A total of 94 on-site parking spaces are proposed. A Conceptual Design Review application was submitted and reviewed by the Design Review Board on July 17, 2018. The applicant submitted photos from seven (7) different development designs as examples for the proposed exterior materials, as well as a conceptual site plan (see Exhibit 3). The Board was generally supportive of the conceptual design presented. Board comments are summarized on Page 3 of this staff report. A formal application for an Environmental and Design Review Permit was submitted on November 8, 2018. Photosimulations of the proposed project are included in Exhibit 6. Based on review of the applicable design criteria, which is discussed in detail below, staff has identified issues with the project as discussed below. Staff requests that the Board review this report and provide a recommendation on compliance with all pertinent design criteria. Specifically, staff asks the Board to consider the following: Site Plan • Recommendations on design of the proposed paseos and pedestrian walkways. • Recommendation on location of HVAC units on the ground. Architecture • Recommendation on the "Dublin" design choice. • Recommendation for exterior finished for utility boxes (shown on Elevation Plan Sheets A-11, A-15, A-19, A-23 and A-27) . • Recommendations on overall building bulk and mass. • Recommendations on recessed balcony design. • Recommendations on roof venting (11" x 17" roof plan showing vents distributed at dais). • Recommendations on possible shadowing impacts along the south property line. Materials and Colors • Recommendation on proposed Color and Materials. Landscaping • Recommendation on choice of landscape plants and hardscape design pattern. • Recommendation for "enhanced" paving identified at crossings shown on Sheet L4. • Recommendation for proposed height of light poles (12') shown on Sheet L5. BACKGROUND Site Description & Setting: The project site is a flat "through" lot, fronting on both the east side by Merrydale Avenue and the west side by Redwood Highway. There are two existing easements on the project site: 1) a 25 -foot wide Marin County Flood Control easement (including a 15 -foot -wide maintenance access easement) along 2 the north side of the property; and 2) a 22 -foot wide roadway/utility easement along the east side of the property (running north to south). The project site is bordered on the north by Las Gallinas Creek - a "blue line" creek on the USGS maps and also listed as a creek in Exhibit 37 of Conservation Element in the San Rafael General Plan 2020. It has been described by the Marin County Flood Control District staff as a "highly disturbed" creek that flows into the South Fork of Las Gallinas Creek. Also, to the - north of the project site is a one-story Public Storage building complex. To the south of the project -site are several two (2) and three (3) story apartment complexes located on the north side of Merrydale Avenue, between Las Gallinas Avenue and Willow Avenue. Across Merrydale (west of the project site) are the fenced rear yards of several one-story, single-family homes fronting on Las Flores Avenue. Also, one block south at 3773 Redwood (fronting on Redwood Highway) is Oakmont of San Rafael, a three-story (35' in height) senior living facility approved by the Planning Commission in January 2018 and construction drawings are currently in Building Permit Plan Check. History: The project site is zoned Planned Development (PD1594). This PD(1594) zoning is specific to the existing use on site - a learning center for training 120 developmentally disabled adults. The existing site is developed with three (3) one-story classroom buildings and a parking lot. The site has operated since 1990, under a Use Permit approved by the Planning Commission (UP90-22). However, this Use Permit does not allow residential uses and therefore the project site is required to be rezoned to a new PD to accommodate the proposed residential development project. The proposed project was reviewed by Planning staff as a Pre -Application in January 2018. The project was then reviewed by the Design Review Board as a Conceptual Design on July 17, 2018. A summary of the Board's comments on the conceptual plans are listed below: 1. Use of the site is appropriate. 2. Supportive of the "Dublin Design" choice (See Exhibit 3). 3. Project site is a transitional site. 4. Articulation is good. 5. Proposed use of creek as a promenade is an "asset". 6. Pay attention to massing with respect to the decks. 7. Make a strong effort to mitigate privacy- provide stepbacks (project has eliminated proposed roof decks). 8. Avoid California Pepper in landscape plan. 9. Be aware that bio -retention will impact landscape design. 10. Create more permeable surfaces on site. 11. Avoid boxy look shown on site plan. 12. Provide more ground level open space, and amenities for kids. 13. Provide a shadow study. and work on roof deck design The public comments received by the Board at the July 17, 2018 Conceptual Design Review hearing are summarized below: 1. Provide landscaping that provides immediate screening along the with 300 Merrydale.) 2. The proposed 4t" story is ridiculous, need to mitigate height for (project revised to be only three (3) stories.) 3. Possible flooding issues — Creek takes in all the drainage from San 4. Possible light pollution and noise from decks. 5. Not enough parking on Merrydale. 6. Can there be more units on site? 7. There should be flexibility on improving the creek area. 8. Can east side driveway be incorporated as open space amenity? 9. Focus on improving Merrydale streetscape. 10. Roof decks OK. south property line (shared residents along Las Flores Rafael Meadows. 3 11. Consider off-site improvements- possibly pave dirt path on Merrydale . 12. Improve bicycle access. 13. Redwood Highway is very narrow- can it be widened? 14. Loop Redwood Highway into site and use Merrydale to exit site. 15. Pull Las Gallinas Watershed Council in for review. The applicant has provided revisions to the conceptual plans that address many of the public concerns, as well the Board's comments, including: 1) increasing the front setback on the Merrydale frontage from 8 feet 1 inch to 15 feet, 2 inches from the Merrydale property line; 2) eliminating the proposed roof decks; 3) eliminating the proposed ADU's; 4) eliminating the California Pepper tree species; 5) providing more details on the creek promenade area (which will also have amenities for youth to play); and 6) adding bio -retention information to landscape plan. Also, the side yard setback along the south property line was reduced from 10 feet to a setback of 7-9 feet (approximately) in order to re -design and eliminate the proposed building encroachment into the required 25' creek setback. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Use: The project proposes to construct nine (9) three-story buildings, with 45 "for -sale" townhome units. Each building will have garages (1 -car and 2 -car) and a mix of two-bedroom units (25), three- bedroom units (12) and four-bedroom units (8). There are four (4) different floor plans proposed (see 11" x 17" sized Plan Sheets A-4 to A-10 for examples). Unit sizes range. from 836 sf to 2,119 sf. A total of 9 units would be Below Market Rate (BMR) units — Units #4, #9, #18, #24, #19, #29, #30, #36 and #43 (See Plan SP -2 for BMR unit location). Also see the Applicant's Project Description (Exhibit 2) and selected pages of the proposed project plans (Exhibit 4). Site Plan: The proposed project is designed with nine (9) three-story buildings on the 2.28 -acre project site (see Plan Sheet SP -1). Access to the site is proposed from both Merrydale Road and from Redwood Highway (via an existing roadway/utility easement). The project would enhance the existing creek/maintenance easement area along the north side of the property with pedestrian improvements, landscaping and passive play activities. A total of 94 parking spaces are proposed as two -car garages (including 20 tandem garage spaces), and 7 uncovered spaces (including one (1) ADA space). Separate guest parking is not required for projects that qualify for parking "concessions" in affordable housing projects, pursuant to SRMC Section 14.16.030.H. Required curb and gutter improvements will allow the creation of an additional four (4) on -street parking spaces along the east side of Merrydale Road that will be available as public parking. This is in addition to the existing 5 on -street parking spaces along the property frontage, for a total of nine (9) on -street parking spaces available for public parking. Architecture: At the Conceptual Design Review Board hearing on July 17, 2018, the applicant presented photos of several examples of building designs/materials for development projects in several northern and southern California communities (see Exhibit 3). The Board recommended the "Dublin Design". No other color palette was discussed at the conceptual hearing, except what was shown in the photo illustrations at the Conceptual Design Review hearing. The formal submittal proposes buildings that are a "modern/contemporary" architectural design. The materials proposed are a mix of stone, glass and plaster (see Color and Materials Board). The design includes recessed 'balconies (i.e., that do not extend beyond the building roof) and stepbacks to provide articulation and reduce building mass. The applicant has submitted a discussion of his architectural design on Page 2 of Exhibit 2. Landscaping: Plan Sheets L1 and L4 show the proposed planting plan and details for the project site. Also included are details for the existing creek area along the north side of the property. The project proposes to create a "dual use" Creek Promenade, combining pedestrian access, passive outdoor activity and children play opportunities (see Plan Sheet L3), as well as a separate 10' wide vehicular access road (see Plan Sheet L2). Sheet L4 shows examples of proposed fencing, benches, decking and furniture. A total of 28 trees are proposed to be removed from the site (see Exhibit 5: Tree 4 Removal Plan/Tree Site Inventory). Several existing trees will remain along the north side of the property near the creek and in other perimeter locations, as shown on Plan Sheet L1. A total of 63 trees are proposed to be planted throughout the project site: Wilson Olive, Brisbane Box, Capitol Pear, Strawberry Tree, Carolina Cherry and Sweet Bay. Also, Pacific Dogwood and Madrone Trees would be planted specifically along the "boardwalk" creek promenade. In addition to landscaping, there is also hardscape proposed throughout the project site, including scored concrete -paving, "permatrak" decking across the bio -retention areas, paseos, and permeable pavers with a boardwalk pattern along the dual use maintenance easement. Lighting: The project proposes to add a total of nine (9) light poles at a height of 12 feet and 58 light bollards (see Plan Sheet L5), as well as building wall sconce lighting as shown on Plan Sheet A-33. A Photometric Plan was provided. Grading/Drainage: A total of 7,500 cu.yds of cut, 12,000 cu.yds of fill is proposed. Total off -haul estimated is 2,000 cu.yds. ANALYSIS General Plan 2020 Consistency: The following policies are pertinent to the Board's review and comment on the project design concept: ➢ CD -3 (Neighborhoods): Recognize, preserve and enhance the positive qualities that give neighborhoods their unique identities. Staff Analysis: The proposed project would introduce a 3 -story structure across the street from the predominantly single story single-family residential neighborhood, and adjacent to a two-story apartment building. However, the maximum height limit allowed per General Plan Exhibit 7 is 36 feet and the project proposes a height of 33' 5". The proposed project is below the maximum height limit and is in keeping with the scale of the existing two-story apartment buildings along the west side of Merrydale Road. ➢ Policy NH -86 (Design Considerations for Development in the Vicinity of the Civic Center): Per San Rafael General Plan 2020 (Exhibit 16), the proposed project site is in the vicinity of both the Rafael Meadows/Los Ranchitos Neighborhood and the Civic Center Neighborhood and would be highly visible from Highway 101 Freeway and the Civic Center. As such, the project will require: ■ Urban design analysis to assure the project's compatibility of materials, color and building mases with Civic Center. ■ Consideration of recommendations in the Civic Center Station Area Plan. This includes future options listed such as: SMART commuter parking spaces, residential parking permit program, neighborhood connectivity and bicycle improvements. The Civic Center Station Area Plan (amendments to the Plan adopted by the City Council on September 16, 2013) contains several design recommendations with respect to Merrydale Road: • Respect for the context of nearby single-family neighborhood. ■ Care should be taken to protect privacy of the rear yards of single-family residences backing onto Merrydale. ■ Buildings should be located facing sidewalks with minimal setbacks, and front doors readily and clearly accessible from the sidewalk. ■ New development should have varied and articulated facades to reduce bulk. ■ Provide active uses, public open space and/or well maintained landscaping to create interest along the sidewalk, making a pleasant pedestrian experience. 5 Respond to existing residential context in the use of materials and architectural design- new development should fit well and be compatible with the existing neighborhood. Staff Analysis: The project design_ will be reviewed as part of the Design Review Permit process (see Chapter 25 analysis on Pages 9 of this staff report). The project has incorporated many of the recommendations from the Civic Center Station Area Plan, including buildings fronts facing Merrydale with access from the street, landscaping along Merrydale Road and within the project site, articulated setbacks and elimination of roof decks to preserve privacy on adjacent residential lots, and a new creek promenade that will enhance the creek and encourage pedestrian use. ➢ Policy NH -88b: Safe Walkways and Bikeways: Encourage the provision of lighting and sidewalks to ensure safe and attractive walkways and bikeways from the transit center on both sides of Civic center Drive, to the Northgate Area. Staff Analysis: The proposed project will add a new sidewalk along the portion of Merrydale fronting on the project site. Also, the project will be required to provide improvements along Merrydale Road in keeping with the 2018 adopted update of the San Rafael Bicycle/Pedestrian Master Plan. The Plan identifies Merrydale Road for a Class III Bike Lane. Currently, the "link" to the SMART train for a pedestrian/cyclist would be to head west down Las Gallinas Ave, where they would reach the. signalized pedestrian grade crossing, allowing them to legally cross the railroad tracks and access the existing SMART Multi -Use Path (MUP) on the west side of the tracks. SMART has reviewed the project and indicated to Planning staff that at this time, there are no plans to construct an additional MUP on the east side of the tracks, and no plans for a pedestrian path from Merrydale Road. ➢ Policy NH -148 (Residential Uses at the End of Merrydale): Promotes residential use at the end of Merrydale Road. Staff Analysis: The proposed project -would introduce new residential development adjacent to an existing apartment complex and just south of the last lot at the end of Merrydale (currently a public storage facility). ➢ CON -6.a (Creeks and Drainageway Setbacks): Creek Setback. Maintain a minimum 25 -foot development -free setback from the top of creek banks for all new development (including, but not limited to, paving and structures), except for Miller Creek and its tributaries, where a minimum 50 -foot setback shall be maintained. Setbacks up to 100 feet may be required on lots or development projects two or more acres in size where development review determines a wider setback is needed to maintain functions and resulting habitat values and in areas where high quality riparian habitat exists. Staff Analysis: The project has been re -designed to eliminate any proposed townhome structure from encroaching into the 25' creek setback. However, the project is proposing (and staff supports) the concept of a dual usecreek promenade to enhance the existing creek area. New trees will be planted along the top of the creek back on the south side. The proposed design will allow access for the required creek maintenance activities by the City's Department of Public Works (DPW), as well as allow pedestrian access, passive outdoor uses, and a children activity area. ➢ CON -7 (Public Access to Creeks): Provide pedestrian access to points along creeks throughout the City where such .access will not adversely affect habitat values. Through development review, identify and secure areas appropriate for access points to creeks Con Staff Analysis: The project proposes pedestrian access and landscaping improvements along the creek north of the project site. This includes new landscaping, removable benches, fencing, and active children play areas that will serve to enhance the creekside area. The proposed improvements have been reviewed and collective supported by Planning staff and DPW. The applicant has also presented the project to the County at their Marin Project Coordination Meeting (MPC). This is a monthly meeting hosted by the Marin County Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (MCSTOPPP) to review and guide projects through the environmental and regulatory process. The meeting is informal and is meant to provide guidance and feedback only. Formal comments and input for projects is provided once a permit application is submitted (if required). The proposed project received input from staff representing the County Flood Control District, RWQCB, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the Army Corps of Engineers, and the creek promenade was designed based on these comments. See Zoning Ordinance Analysis (Chapter 16 -Section 14.16.080) on Page 7 for further analysis. Zonina Ordinance Consistency: Chapter 14.07 (Planned Development) The project site is currently zoned PD(1594), which does not allow residential uses. Therefore, both parcels would have to be rezoned to accommodate the proposed project. The purpose of the Planned Development (PD) is to allow innovative design on large sites, by allowing flexibility in development standards, promote clustering on large sites to avoid sensitive areas, as well as other reasons cited in SRMC 14.07.010. When a PD zoning does not allow for a proposed development, the applicant needs to either: 1) request a Rezoning to a standard (conventional zoning district, like General Commercial or High Density Residential); or 2) amend the PD to a new PD District, with appropriate standards set forth specifically to specifically allow residential use. Either option is an acceptable approach for this project. Staff has recommended to the applicant that the parcel be rezoned to a new PD and not a specific residential zoning district (e.g., HR -1), in order to allow more flexibility in setbacks and site design. In this particular case, the applicant has proposed to rezone the property to a new PD, which would designate the proposed 45 -unit condominium project as the new development on the site. The required rezoning will trigger Environmental (CEQA) Review (Initial Study/Negative Declaration), and City Council approval with the recommendation of both the Design Review Board and Planning Commission. Pursuant to Zoning Ordinance 14.07.035: "the Community Development Director shall determine based on development characteristics, use and density, and the contiguous zoning districts, a zoning district adopted within this title that is most compatible to the PD district. The regulations and spatial standards of the most compatible zoning district shall be applied, subject to the approval of an environmental and design review permit." The City supports the proposed re -zoning to a new PD District but has determined that the most compatible project design would be one that incorporates the style of the surrounding two-story, multi -family properties on the west side of Merrydale, which are zoned HR -1 (High Density Residential). This design choice is more appropriate than using the R7.5 (Single Family Zoning) design like the residential homes along the east side of Merrydale. In terms of density, SRMC Section 14.17.030 stipulates that "the total number of dwelling units in a PD plan shall not exceed the maximum permitted by the General Plan 2020 density for the total site area." The underlying General Plan Designation for the property is General Commercial, which allows a residential density of 15-32 units/gross acre. This equates to between 34 units to 72 units allowed on the approximately 2.28 gross acre site. As such, the proposed 45 units would be consistent with the allowable density range under the GP 2020. State Density Bonuses for affordable housing are allowed if the project qualifies and requests a state density bonus. The applicant is not requesting a State Density Bonus to increase the number of units on site. Based on the HR -1 Development Standards (1 unit per 1,000 square feet of lot area) the maximum number units allowed for the base density would be 99 units on the 99,316 square foot project site. The proposed 45 units is well below the maximum HR -1 base density. The proposed height (33.5') is below the maximum 36' maximum height allowed (per GP 2020 Exhibit 8). 7 Chapter 16 — Site and Use Regulations (Creeks and Other Watercourses) SRMC Section. 14.16.080 requires a twenty-five foot (25) or greater setback between any structure and the high top of the creek bank. The original Conceptual Design showed between a 2' to 5' encroachment into the 25' creek setback for the north _side of buildings_ #1, #2 and #3, with possible additional encroachments proposed for landscaping amenities (fencing and raised planter/seat walls). The project has since been revised and all of the proposed townhome buildings are located outside the 25' creek setback. SRMC Section 14.16.080.D (Creeks and Other Watercourses) specifically states that "Pedestrian and bicycle access is encouraged along creek and drainageway corridors where feasible. However, they should be designed and located so as not to adversely affect important habitat areas. Creeks and drainageways should also be enhanced where feasible to serve as wildlife habitat as well as drainage facilities". • The plan proposes to create a "dual use" creekside area, providing a 10' vehicular access road (with permeable pavers) for trucks to be able to access the creekside and also provides a pedestrian promenade with new landscaping, children activities, removable bollards/fencing and benches. The proposed project has been reviewed by the County of Marin Flood Control District, and the City's DPW and Planning staff. In addition, the project has been informally reviewed by Marin County Stormwater Pollution Prevention (MCSTOPP). Further site analysis is required to adequately analyze the appropriateness of the proposed encroachments and will be provided as part of the CEQA Initial Study document current being prepared. The proposed new "Creek Promenade" is shown on Plan Sheets L2 and L3. Chapter 18 — Parking The parking requirement for the project is based on the number of bedrooms proposed. The parking required (per SRMC Section 14.18.040) for 2 -bedroom units and 3 -bedrooms units (or more) is the same: 2 parking spaces per unit (including I covered space). However, the State Density Bonus parking requirement is 2.5 parking spaces for 4 bedroom units. The project is proposing a total of 45 units with the following breakdown: Table 1: 350 Merrvdale/3833 Redwood Parking Bedrooms Total Quantity City Requirement State Requirement Proposed 2 -bedroom 25 units 50 2 spaces/unit) 50 (2 spaces/unit) 50 3 -bedroom 12 units 24 (2 spaces/unit) 24 (2 spaces/unit) 24 4 -bedroom 8 units 16 (2 spaces per unit) 20 (2_5 spaces per unit 20 Total 45 units 90 spaces 94 spaces 94 spaces The project complies with both the Chapter 18 standards and the State Density Bonus standards by providing 94 parking spaces on site (including one ADA space). As an affordable housing project providing 9 BMR units, the project qualifies for one (1) parking concession, which allows the parking on site to be provided through tandem and uncovered spaces (pursuant to SRMC Section 14.16.030.H.3.a.i). Guest parking and ADA parking are considered inclusive of the required parking as part of the parking concession. The project proposes to provide a total of 20 tandem parking spaces (for Plan 1 and Plan 5X) and also 7 uncovered parking spaces (including 1 ADA space). The location of the uncovered parking spaces is shown on Plan Sheet SP -2 which shows four (4) spaces on Private Street "A" near Building 5, two (2) spaces on Private Street "B" on the south east corner of Redwood Hwy (across from Buildings #5 and #6) and 1 ADA space on private Street "B" (east of Building #4). See table on Plan Sheet SP -1 for parking breakdown for each building. In addition, the re -design of the street and curb cut for the proposed development will provide additional on -street parking along the east side of 0 Merrydale. Currently there are five (5) on -street parking spaces and the project would add four (4) additional parking spaces for a total of nine (9) on -street parking spaces along Merrydale. Chapter 25 — Environmental and Design Review Permit The project should be evaluated for conformance with the _design review criteria identified in SRMC Section 14.25.050. This chapter states that the new structures should be harmoniously integrated in relation to both the specific site design and the architecture in the vicinity in terms of colors and materials, scale and building design. Specific architectural design considerations include, but are not limited to the following: ➢ Creation of interest in the building elevation ➢ Encouragement of natural materials and earth tone/wood tone color ➢ The project size/scale should be analyzed as to the appropriateness to the existing neighborhood scale ➢ Variation in building placement and height ➢ Equal attention to design of all facades ➢ Shadowing on recreational spaces on adjacent properties ➢ Landscape design ➢ Lighting design San Rafael Design Guidelines In addition, the project is reviewed based on the San Rafael Design Guidelines, which are discretionary and intended to assist projects in achieving high quality design. Staff has determined the following Design Guidelines need to be discussed as part of the proposed project design: ➢ Building Design: Where there is an existing pattern, particular attention should be given to maintaining consistent streetscape. ➢ Scale: Where necessary to replicate existing patterns or character of development, design techniques should be used to break up the volume of larger buildings into smaller units. Transitional elements, such as stepped facades, roof decks and architectural details that help merge larger buildings into an existing neighborhood should be used. ➢ Building Height: Adjacent buildings should be considered, and transitional elements included to minimize apparent height differences. ➢ Roof Shapes: Where possible, relate new roof form to those found in the area. ➢ Building Entrances: Usable front porches, verandas or an overhead trellis can be used to define the primary entrance and to further define street the fagade. ➢ Parking: Driveway curb cuts and widths should be minimized. The project is generally consistent with the design criteria of SRMC Section 14.25.050 of the Zoning Ordinance in that: 1) the proposed development has been designed with elements recommended by the Board during Conceptual Design Review; 2) the exterior materials are a mixture of several materials to add interest to all building elevations and create a contemporary look for the site; 3) the buildings along Merrydale are oriented to the street with a define primary entry pathway; 4) paseos on site and the creek promenade will promote pedestrian gathering; and 5) landscaping would be added to the site, including a total of 63 trees and a variety of shrubs and perennials. Staff is generally support of the project design choices and has determined that the project is consistent with the intent of both Chapter 25, the Non -Residential Design Guidelines and the Civic Center Station Area Plan (as discussed under General Plan Policy NH -86 on Page 6). However, staff requests that the Board provide comment on the overall project design, specifically: Whether the Color and Materials reflect the "Dublin" Design as recommended. At the July 17, 2018 Conceptual Design Review meeting, the Board members supported the "Dublin" design (see Exhibit 3). The applicant's current design appears to approximate the Dublin design, except with less stone in the upper portions of the building fagade. M 2. Whether privacy concerns for the windows at 300 Merrydale (along the project's south side yard property line) have been addressed. 3. Whether the proposed "modern/contemporary" building design/materials are appropriate. 4. Whether a shadow study is recommended. 5. Whether the location/types of recreational amenities are appropriate. 6. Whether the proposed landscape design/species and hardscape are appropriate, as well as the overall design of the creek promenade including benches and fencing. 7. Whether the proposed 12' light pole should be reduced. 8. Whether the lighting levels shown in the photometric plan are acceptable. NEIGHBORHOOD CORRESPONDENCE Staff attending a Neighborhood Meeting on July 25, 2019. Neighbors were generally supportive of the proposed housing development and felt that it was good to have an investment in the community. However, they did have the following questions and comments as summarized below: 1. Potential impact on circulation and parking on Merrydale and the neighboring San Rafael Meadows community from the proposed 45 new units. 2. Emergency planning: How will residents exit the area if there is an evacuation? Is there a plan for another freeway on/off ramp? 3. What is the cumulative traffic/parking impacts from both the recently approved Oakmont development and 350 Merrydale? 4. Will there be an economic analysis? 5. Is there any plan to widen Redwood Highway? 6. Will utility poles along Merrydale be updated? 7. Will 350 Merrydale be undergrounding utilities? 8. Will there be bike racks and also bike storage lockers on the project site? 9. Will tandem parking work? 10. Will CC&R's require garages be used exclusively for vehicle parking? Staff also received one phone call about the project, with questions about traffic impacts and whether the project would provide street improvements to comply with the San Rafael Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. E-mail/hard copy comments received since the July 17, 2018 Conceptual Design Review hearing and the upcoming Design Review hearing are included as Exhibit 7. CONCLUSION Overall, staff supports the proposed project, subject to further information from the CEQA analysis. Staff requests the Board's recommendations and comments on the overall design of the proposed project and specifically the following issues below (also listed on Page 2 of this report): 1. Recommendations on design of the proposed paseos and pedestrian walkways. 2. Recommendation on location of HVAC units on the ground. 3. Recommendation on the "Dublin" design. 4. Recommendation for exterior finished for utility boxes (shown on Elevation Plan Sheets A-11, A -15,-A-19, A-23 and A-27). 5. Recommendations on overall building bulk and mass. 6. Recommendations on recessed balcony design. 7. Recommendations on roof venting (11" x 17" roof plan showing vents distributed at dais). 8. Recommendations on possible shadowing impacts along the south property line. 9. Recommendation on proposed Color and Materials. 10. Recommendation on choice of landscape plants and hardscape and pattern. 11. Recommendation for "enhanced" paving identified at crossings shown on Sheet 1-4. 12. Recommendation for proposed height of light poles (12') shown on Sheet 1-5. 10 EXHIBITS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Applicant's Project Description, dated June 2019 3. Conceptual Building Designs Reviewed by the Board on July 17, 2018 4. Proposed Project Plans (reduced) 5. Tree Removal Plan/Tree Site Inventory 6. Photo simulations 7. Public Correspondence Full-sized plans have been provided to the Board members only. cc: Michael Hooper, applicant, mhooper(a)-campusproperty.com Francine M. Clayton, Ridgewood Properties, property owner, david2acobsonl0l(a)-gmail.com San Rafael Meadows Improvement Association, waynemrayburn(@yahoo.com Taylor Brown, 260 Merrydale Road HOA, tbrown(a-)_commoninterest.com Craig Murray, craig_murray@ci.richmond.ca.us 11 7/29/2019 SanRafael X: Y: — 1 feature(s) selected on 1 layer(s) 1:1 3357.77 _ 3730.81 x 2480.41 (ft) EXHIBIT 1 gis.cityofsanrafael.org/sanrafael/fusion.php 1/1 350 MERRYDALE ROAD, SAN RAFAEL JUNE 2019 Environmental and Design Review Tentative Map Re -Zoning to new Planned Development Environmental Review Affordable Housing Ordinance/Density Bonus Law Requests ED18-100/TS18-006/UP18-039/1518 -001/NM18-001 PROJECT SETTING The proposed Project is located at the end of the south portion of Merrydale Road and Redwood Highway close to the new Civic Center SMART station in an area comprising a combination of commercial and residential uses. Redwood Highway presently dead ends into the Project site. Nearby commercial uses are generally located to the south along the Highway 101 frontage road, Redwood Highway, the exception being the soon to be built Oakmont senior living facility. A public storage facility is located directly to the north. Multifamily residential condos and apartments are located to the south along the east side of Merrydale Road. The predominantly one-story Rafael Meadows residential neighborhood is to the west. The Highway 101 right-of-way forms the Project site's eastern boundary, though the Highway is elevated by as much as 18 feet to 8 feet above the Project site. Las Gallinas Creek straddles the northern property line and an unidentified drainageway straddles the eastern property line. The southern bank of Las Gallinas Creek generally comprises rip rap placed there some years ago by the City of San Rafael for erosion control. The western bank of the drainageway is unimproved. The top of bank of each is almost 100% well defined with a 6" curb. The Project site was improved in the late 1950s with school buildings and playground/parking lot. The Project site enjoys excellent views of the surrounding hills, the Civic Center and the wetlands to the east over the freeway. The Project site is easily walkable to the SMART station, commuter and local buses, Civic Center area employment opportunities, Northgate Mall and local shops, restaurants and service businesses. School children attend Venetia Valley (K-8) Elementary School and San Rafael High or Terra Linda High School. 1 EXHIBIT PROJECT DESCRIPTION The goal of the Project is to provide attractive yet affordable work force housing for a range of family sizes at a density that is appropriate to its location and to community goals. The project consists of a mixture of 45 for -sale townhomes and stacked flats, and a Community Room on an approximate 2.28 -acre site. The Project site has primary access from Merrydale Road and secondary access from Redwood Highway. A new T-shaped private road will link Merrydale Road with Redwood Highway. There are 41 three-story townhomes proposed and 4 stacked flats in 5 different building types. A total of 9 buildings will range from 4 to 8 units. Building 4 will include 4 stacked flats over parking at one end, and over parking and the Community Room at the other end. The project will provide 20% of the units (9 units) for sale to persons of Low and Moderate Income earning 50-80% and 80-120 % respectively of the Area Wide Median Income adjusted for family size. Five (5) units will be affordable to persons of Low Income and four (4) units affordable to persons of Moderate Income. The location of the Low and Moderate Income units are shown on the plans. The Project has generally been oriented to the north and west to take advantage of the view opportunities and to provide an attractive Merrydale Road street frontage, and to celebrate the creek with a dual-purpose Creek Promenade. This orientation has the additional advantage of limited exposure to the freeway and providing a noise block to the adjacent Rafael Meadows neighborhood. The Merrydale Road frontage will be improved with new curb, gutter, sidewalk and landscaping providing for 9 street parking spaces. In addition to the new Merrydale Road sidewalk, pedestrian access will be available along the Creek Promenade and Private Street A and Private Street B providing continuous pedestrian access from Redwood Highway to Merrydale Road. Primary vehicular access will be from Merrydale Road via a two-way street (Private Street A), and from Redwood Boulevard via a two-way street (Private Street B). All sides of each building will be within 150 feet fire hose pull length of any fire apparatus parked equipment. At least one side of each building will have an eave height not to exceed 30 feet. Therefore, no aerial ladder fire truck access will be necessary. Architecture The architecture for 350 Merrydale Road is inspired by its dynamic, transitional setting which is nestled between an existing neighborhood of single-family homes, apartments, commercial buildings and Highway 101. Fresh, contemporary styling is created through the use of a mix of modern and classic materials: stone, glass, and plaster. The elegant, rectilinear massing of the building is balanced by numerous projections and recesses; positive and negative planes that produce articulation, movement, and deep shadows. A playful and interesting facade that continues on all four sides of each building is enhanced with the use of a smooth plaster wall surface. The plaster walls are further enhanced with strategically placed score Fines and a rich palate of three different colors that provide interest and variety while maintaining a continuity of design. Accents of different materials such as horizontal wood toned siding appear at the projections as well as a neutral colored cut stone that grounds the buildings at the base and provides a rich texture for the pedestrian. To achieve an elegant and timeless look, additional details consist of contemporary windows, simple posts, wire mesh railings and composition shingle roofing. Furthermore, each unit attains an identity through varied entry door colors. The fourth level roof decks have been eliminated to reduce the height, mass and bulk and to enhance the privacy of adjacent properties. To further protect privacy, the private, useable outdoor living spaces are limited to decks at the second level rather than at the fourth level. Landscape Plan The proposed landscape plan includes Merrydale Road frontage, two pedestrian Paseos, and the dual-purpose Creek Promenade. The homes along Merrydale Road are proposed to have private front patios with low stucco walls and gates to promote interface with neighbors, while creating a sense of separation from the street. The Paseo between Buildings 7 and 8 is 23 feet wide and provides access to the entries of the homes at either side. It has a central planter which serves as a bio -filtration treatment area. Two decks span the central planter, creating points of connection from the front walks. These decks have bench seating to foster neighbor interaction. The Paseo between Buildings 2, 3 and 4 is 29 feet wide and provides access to the entries of Building 2 and connectivity to the Creek Promenade. This Paseo also has a central planter which serves as a bio -filtration treatment area. There is a Boardwalk proposed which spans the center of the planter and provides a connection from the Paseo walk to Private Alley 2. A large 480 sq. ft. deck area is proposed off of the Community Room to serve as space for the residents to gather. This deck is furnished with tables and planters with vertical screens and vine plantings to provide separation to the adjacent entries at Building 2. Dual Purpose Creek Promenade A key feature of the Project is the Creek Promenade. The Creek Promenade has been designed to celebrate the Creek as opposed to turning the Project's back or side onto it. The Creek Promenade will be dual purpose combining pedestrian access, passive outdoor use and children's play opportunities with the occasional creek maintenance requirements. A segregated dual purpose 10' wide linear path will be provided with trees on the creek side. Vehicular access for Marin County Flood Control District (MCFCD)/City of San Rafael creek maintenance vehicles will be provided from Private Alley 1 and Private Street B at which points there will be reinforced paved concrete pads for a crane to use in the event a tree needs to be removed from the creek. Three sections of removable fence will be provided for direct creek access. The creek and the freeway drainageway will be protected from the migration of debris 3 and other objects with a continuous mesh fence along the top of bank. The top of creek bank will be lined with trees. Privacy Concerns At the August 2018 Conceptual Design Review Meeting a small number of homeowners from the San Rafael Meadows neighborhood expressed concerns about potential view and privacy impacts to their homes on Las Flores. All but one of the Las Flores homes have one or more mature trees that at least partially block views of the Project. Further to address those concerns the proposal for roof top decks on Buildings 1 and 9 units was dropped and a line of trees has been included on the Merrydale frontage. Views of the July 4th fireworks from the Las Flores homes should not be materially blocked. At the same DRB meeting, one tenant of the northernmost building of the Monte Vista Apartments (300 Merrydale Road) expressed concerns about the potential loss of privacy resulting from the side windows of Buildings 7, 8 and 9. There are 8 units in this two story building, each with one or two bedroom windows (and a small high level frosted bathroom window) facing the Project. Five mature and tall (40') California Bays and a substantial and mature property line schrub screen (15') are located between the Monte Vista building and the property line providing adequate privacy screening. Additionally, a substantial and mature property line schrub screen (15') along with three trees (#42, #43 and #44) are located to the east screening the Monte Vista Apartments pool. Trees #42, #43 and #44 were previously proposed for removal but are now proposed to be retained. However tree #34 located on the south west corner of the Project site is proposed to be removed because of its poor health and condition, and the manner in which it encroaches into the public right of way. This should not impact privacy of the pool area from the Project. To further address the privacy concerns of the Monte Vista apartment tenants we will provide high level windows, with frosted glass on bathroom windows, only on the south side of Buildings 7, 8 and 9. Townhomes (All Buildings) Individual homes will all generally be accessed from Merrydale Road, the new T-shaped private street, the Creek Promenade and the Paseos. In all cases garage access will be from the opposite side of the primary access, and all units, except the flats, will have direct access from the garages to the homes. Generally, bedrooms are located on the top floor with living spaces on the middle floor. Only access and garage spaces are on the ground floor of Plans 1 and 2. Plan 3 is a deeper unit allowing for a 4th bedroom option on the ground floor along with access and garage spaces. There are 10 of these units, up to 8 will have the 4th bedroom option. In the other 2, that space C! will be a bonus room used for any one of a variety of home-based uses such as a kid's playroom, home office, TV room or even storage. Building 4/Stacked Flats/Community Room Building 4 comprises one Plan 1, two Plan 3s, four stacked flats and a Community Room. The Community Room will be located at the west end of the building adjoining the Paseo so that a patio over a portion of the bio -retention area can be provided. A kitchen, bathroom and storage area will be provided as part of the Community Room. The intent of the Community Room is to keep it flexible so that a variety of uses may be accommodated, such as meetings, card games, after school homework room and the like. Two single car garages will be located to the rear and two stacked flats will be located above (Plan 4 and Plan 5) the Community Room. At the east end of Building 4 there will also be two stacked flats (Plan 4X and Plan 5X slightly modified for this location closer to the freeway and close to the trash enclosure). In this location, Plan 4X will have a one -car garage and Plan 5X will have a 2 -car tandem garage. Plan Types There will be 5 different Plan Types comprising a mixture of 2-, 3- and 4 -bedroom units (with some variations). Plan 1 (1,285 sq. ft.) is a three-story 2 -bed/ 2.5 bath with tandem garage townhome unit. Plan 2 (1,461 sq. ft.) is also a three-story 2-bed/2.5 bath townhome unit but with a conventional side by side 2 -car garage. Plan 2X (1,461 sq. ft.) is the same as Plan 2 but with 3 beds/3.5 baths. Plan 3 (2,116 sq. ft.) is a three-story 3-bed/2.5 bath plus bonus room with a 2 -car side by side garage townhome unit with an option for a 4th bedroom in lieu of a bonus room. The 4th bedroom option will be available for up to 8 of the 10 Plan 3 units. Plan 4 (785 sq. ft.) and Plan 4X (741 sq. ft.) is a second level 2-bed/1 bath stacked flat with a 1 - car garage. Plan 5 (836 sq. ft.) and Plan 5X (836 sq. ft.) is a third level 2-bed/2 bath stacked flat. Plan 5 has a one -car garage, Plan 5X has a two -car tandem garage. 61 SUMMARYUNIT # of # of Garage Private Private Unit Unit # of Unit QTY Bedrooms/ Bathrooms/ Parking/ Open Open Area/ Area BMR Type Unit Unit Unit Space/ Unit Space Unit (s.f.) Units" (s.f.) (s.f.) (s.f.)* PLAN 1 9 2 2.5 2 117 1,053 1285 11,565 2 PLAN 2 12 2 2.5 2 82 984 11461 17,532 1 PLAN 10 3 3.5 2 82 820 1,461 14,610 3 PLAN 3 2 3 2.5 2 108 216 2,119 4,238 1 61 PLAN 8 4 3.5 2 108 864 2,119 2.0 18 PLAN 2 12 2 2.0 24 PLAN 2X 10 3 16,952 0 PLAN 4 1 2 1 1 0 0 785 785 1 PLAN 1 2 1 1 132 132 741 2.0 2 4X 1 2 2.0 2 741 1 PLAN 5 1 2 2 1 0 0 836 836 0 PLAN 1 2 2 2 132 132 836 5X 836 0 Total 45 - - - 4,201 - 68,095 9 * Measured from the exterior wall, excluding garage ** Units 4, 9, 18, 24 (2nd floor), 19 (second floor), 29, 30, 36 and 43 are BMR units. See SP2 for details. Parking Since the Project is a residential development project of five (5) or more units, providing 20% of the units as affordable to persons of Low and Moderate Income, the applicable parking standards are those provided in San Rafael Municipal Code s.14.16.030.H.3.a.i. Maximum Affordable Housing Required Parking: San Rafael Municipal Code s. 14.16.030. H. 3. a. i. Concession not requiring Financial Pro Forma inclusive of tandem, handicapped and guest: 0-1 bedroom dwelling unit 1 on-site parking space 2-3 bedroom dwelling units 2 on-site parking spaces 4 or more bedroom dwelling units 2.5 parking spaces San Rafael Municipal Code s. 14.18.040. A Table 14.18.040 does not apply. Unit Type Quantity PARKINGREQUIRED # of Bedrooms Required Parking/Unit Total Required Parking PLAN 1 9 2 2.0 18 PLAN 2 12 2 2.0 24 PLAN 2X 10 3 2.0 20 PLAN 3 2 3 2.0 4 PLAN 3X 8 4 2.5 20 PLAN 4 1 2 2.0 2 PLAN 4X 1 2 2.0 2 PLAN 5 1 2 2.0 2 0 Note that there is a total of 10 Plan 3s, up to 8 of which will have the option of having a ground level 4th bedroom, increasing the parking requirement to 2.5 spaces per unit inclusive of guest and handicap parking. These 8 units will be selected at the time of sale. The remaining 2 units will have a ground level bonus room instead of a 4t" bedroom. Of the 7 on street parking spaces one will be assigned to Unit 25. Units 19 and 24 will not have an assigned on -street parking space. All units have at least one covered space in garages. Garages will be provided with Electric Vehicle hookups. 7 PROVIDED PARKING Provided Provided Total Unit Type Quantity Provided Garage Garage On -street Provided Parking/Unit Parking On-site Parking Parking PLAN 1 9 2 18 7 94 PLAN 2 12 2 24 PLAN 2X 10 2 20 PLAN 3 2 2 4 PLAN 3X 8 2 16 PLAN 4 1 1 1 PLAN 4X 1 1 1 PLAN 5 1 1 1 PLAN 5X 1 2 2 Note that there is a total of 10 Plan 3s, up to 8 of which will have the option of having a ground level 4th bedroom, increasing the parking requirement to 2.5 spaces per unit inclusive of guest and handicap parking. These 8 units will be selected at the time of sale. The remaining 2 units will have a ground level bonus room instead of a 4t" bedroom. Of the 7 on street parking spaces one will be assigned to Unit 25. Units 19 and 24 will not have an assigned on -street parking space. All units have at least one covered space in garages. Garages will be provided with Electric Vehicle hookups. 7 Easements The property is constrained by 5 easements, 3 of which are currently paved: A 25 feet wide Marin County Flood Control District (MCFCD) flood control easement (the creek). This easement is to remain. 2. A 15 feet wide Marin County Flood Control District (MCFCD) maintenance access easement immediately adjacent to the 25 feet wide MCFD flood control easement. This easement was Quit Claimed to the City of San Rafael in 1977. Maintenance appears to be administered by the MCFCD but is expected to be the responsibility of the City of San Rafael in the future. This easement is to remain unless the City of San Rael or Marin County reuire that it be re -written. In addition a Public Access Easement/Public Utility Easement (PAE/PUE) will be provided at the time of recordation of the Final Map. This PAE/PUE will cover a portion of the Creek Promenade. 3. A north south easement of variable width for Roadway and Utility purposes to an unstated party but presumably to the City of San Rafael along the eastern (freeway) property line. This easement is to remain. In addition, a Public Access Easement/Public Utility Easement (PAE/PUE) will be provided at the time of recordation of the Final Map. This PAE/PUE comprises Private Street B providing pedestrian, vehicular, fire truck and trash truck access and required parking. 4. A north south Las Gallinas Valley sewer easement, a portion of which is currently unoccupied. This easement is to be Quit Claimed and replaced with a PAE/PUE at the time of recordation of the Final Map. An east west private water line easement serving the property to the south. This easement is to remain. Upon recordation of the Final Map, all maintenance responsibilities of the PAE/PUE easement areas will become the responsibility of the owner, and subsequently the Home Owners Association. Site Area The gross acreage of the Project site is reduced by the MCFCD/City of San Rafael easements as follows: Gross Area: Less: 2.28 acres MCFCD 25 -foot wide flood control easement (0.21 acres) E:1 MCFCD 15 -foot wide maintenance easement (0.11acres) City of San Rafael Roadway/Utility easement (0.25 acres) Overlap of easements 0.03 acres Net Area exclusive of easements 1.74 acres The existing improvements cover almost 100% of the Project site when the MCFCD easement (creek) and the freeway drainage drainageway are excluded. The Project is contained within the existing development envelope. No encroachment is proposed within the MCFCD (creek) Easement or the freeway drainageway except that a new storm water outfall will be required with a s.1602 permit from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) to replace an existing one. The new storm water outfall will be above the High Tide Mark of the Las Gallinas Creek. Therefore, no Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) s. 404 permit will be required. Both the MCFCD and the City of San Rafael require that the Project respect the creek and the maintenance easement, and that no fixed vertical improvements be installed in them, though the planting of trees at the top of bank has been allowed. The MCFCD/City of San Rafael February 2019 Joint Agencies Guidelines were used to design the most user-friendly dual- purpose Creek Promenade possible while providing adequate vehicular access for maintenance purposes. Jurisdictional Agencies The Applicant met with the Marin Interagency Project Coordination Committee on January 4, 2019 and April 2, 2019. On each occasion the focus was on anything that might encroach into the relevant agency's jurisdiction such as the storm water outfall and any planting at the top of bank. Since the proposed outfall does not fall below the High Tide Mark, ACE will not take jurisdiction and will provide written confirmation of this when requested. The other agencies said that they are not allowed to comment in writing without a permit application. There was no objection from any agency to planting trees at the top of bank provided they do not destabilize the bank. Creek Setback: No Concession/Incentive or Modification/Waiver required. San Rafael Municipal Code s. 14.16.080 Creeks and Other Watercourses requires a setback of between 25' and 100' between any structure and high top of bank. To accommodate the proposed Project at the density proposed and with the Concessions/Incentives, Modifications/Waivers and Parking Reductions allowed, Applicant is requesting a creek setback of 25 feet. The criteria for determining the amount of setback is set forth in San Rafael Municipal Code s. 14.16.080. C. The setback provides for adequate maintenance, emergency vehicle access, adequate debris flow avalanche corridors, flood control and protection from damage due to stream bank undercutting. The proposed 25 -foot setback from top of bank including the existing 15 -foot MCFCD maintenance easement from top of bank in addition to two reinforced concrete crane pads provides MCFCD maintenance access, emergency vehicle access, adequate debris flow avalanche corridors, flood control and protection from damage due to stream bank undercutting. 2. The setback adequately protects and preserves native riparian and wildlife habitat. According to the biological report prepared by WRA dated March 28, 2018 neither the portion (south bank) of the creek or the portion (west bank) of the freeway drainageway located on the Project site support any native riparian vegetation and provide only marginal habitat for wildlife. The Project does not propose to impact either the creek, the banks of the creek or the freeway drainageway. Development will be confined to the existing developed envelope. 3. The setback protects major view corridors and provides for recreation opportunities where appropriate. There are presently no major view corridors from the Project site or the proposed setback. A one- and two-story storage facility is located directly to the north, the elevated freeway is located to the east, the area to the south is completely developed with residential and commercial uses and the area to the west comprises the Rafael Meadows neighborhood. 4. The setback permits the provision of adequate and attractive natural landscaping. The setback is at least partially constrained by the MCFCD maintenance easement and the City of San Rafael roadway and utility easement. The Project proposes the use of adequate and natural landscaping to the extent permitted by the February 2019 Joint Agencies Guidelines. San Rafael Municipal Code s. 14.16.080. E provides development guidelines for improvements within creek setbacks: Development Guidelines. Pedestrian and bicycle access is encouraged along creek and drainage way corridors where feasible. However, they should be designed and located so as not to adversely affect important habitat areas. Creeks and drainageways should also be enhanced where feasible to serve as wildlife habitat as well as drainage facilities. 10 All of the proposed improvements within the 25 -foot creek setback are feasible and appropriate. Utility closet doors at the north end of Buildings 1 and 2, when opened, do encroach into the 25 -foot creek setback by up to the full width of the door (3 feet). This would occur on a few occasions each month and is better than leaving the closets open. Metal roll up shutter doors cannot be used to screen gas meters. While closet doors are technically part of the building structure, the doors themselves are not structures. San Rafael Municipal Code s. 14.16.080 Creeks and Other Watercourses requires a setback of between 25' and 100' between any structure and high top of bank, not appurtenances to the structure. Tentative Map San Rafael Municipal Code s.15.02.040 The Tentative Map shows just one Common Parcel with PAE and PUE in addition to the existing waterline easement benefiting the adjoining property which is to remain. Proposed site improvements (at a conceptual level) are shown on the Tentative Map prepared by BKF Engineers dated April 2019. Private site improvements are anticipated to consist of private streets and drive alleys serving the residential buildings, pedestrian sidewalks winding through the site, and supporting infrastructure including private sewer, water and storm drain pipes in addition to bioretention facilities to comply with storm water quality regulations. Public improvements are anticipated to consist of re -paving and the installation of public sidewalk along the project side of Merrydale Road along the project frontage. Infrastructure Improvements. The Project proses to connect four new water line laterals to the existing water lines in Merrydale, install new curb, gutter and sidewalk along the Project frontage and reinstate the Merrydale Road right of way affected by the installation. This section of Merrydale is lightly trafficked, access being provided only to the Project site and the storage facility beyond. The existing road surface is generally in good condition with no pot holes whatsoever. The Project proposes to resurface the section of Merrydale in front of the Project site shown on the Tentative Map and slurry coat full width of Merrydale to Las Gallinas Ave. The Project proposes to extend a sewer line from Las Gallinas Ave to the Project site in the Redwood Highway right of way enabling all the property owners along that frontage to connect thereto enabling the future abandonment of the existing old undersized sewer located on private property between the Redwood Highway and Merrydale Road property frontages. The Project will reinstate the Redwood Highway right of way affected by the installation. Home Owners Association/CC & Rs The common areas of the Project will be governed by a home owners association (HOA) which will manage, maintain and operate the Project in accordance with Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&Rs) to be recorded against each unit and the common areas, Articles of 11 Incorporation (Articles) and Bylaws. The HOA will have the right to adopt rules, regulations and guidelines, including design guidelines and community space rules to implement the CC&Rs. All common areas including the Creek Promenade and the Paseos will be owned, managed and controlled by the HOA. Initially the builder will own all units within the project and will control the HOA until sufficient units have been sold for a HOA Board of Directors to be elected. The builder will pay HOA dues to the HOA for each unit until each unit is sold. Trash Removal Plan Space has been allocated in garages for the storage of waste and recyclables in bags or bins. Homeowners will take bags to the central trash enclosure for disposal. Marin Sanitary Service will not provide carts to homeowners where there is a central trash enclosure. The HOA CC&R's will allow for the use of a concierge service to collect the trash bags one or more times per week at additional cost to the HOA upon a vote of approval of the HOA. The trash enclosure is located on Private Street B and has been designed with a separate home owners access and a covered screen. The trash enclosure has been expanded from the earlier proposal to address the concerns of Marin Sanitary District. The trash enclosure will now include the following: Two Bins one 4 -yard bin for trash and a second 2 -yard bin for cardboards. A minimum of 3 carts, 1- Blue 96 gal., 1 -Brown 64 gal. cart, and 1 -Green 64 -gal. cart. Marin Sanitary Service garbage pick-up will occur one or two times per week. Recyclables will be picked as frequently as requested by the HOA at no additional cost. Front loading service trucks will typically enter from Redwood Boulevard (along Private Street B) and park at the Trash enclosure for as long as it takes to load. A reinforced concrete pad sufficient to take the weight of service trucks will be provided at the trash enclosure. Marin Sanitary Service personnel will wheel out (and wheel back) the bins and carts, closing the trash enclosure gate before leaving. Service trucks will typically reverse into Private Street A, picking up from a recyclable paper bin next to the mail boxes before leaving along Private Street B to Redwood Blvd. Marin Sanitary Service offers new communities an informational workshop to new home owners on the proper handling and disposal of garbage and recyclables. One or more workshops will be arranged through the HOA during the sales period using the new Community Room as a venue. Open Space 14.07.060 K. All units with the exception of the two freeway -oriented stacked flats (Plans 4X and 5X) will have private decks. In addition, the Project will provide a Community Room with an outdoor patio, and the amenity laden Creek Promenade. The Project exceeds the open space requirement. 13 Community Room: San Rafael Municipal Code s.15.12.060 A flexible use Community Room comprising +/- 500 sq. ft. that includes a clear 14' 6" x 20' 6" space, kitchen and storage with access to an almost 500 sq. ft. outdoor patio is being provided at the center of the Project. A ping pong table and an appropriate number of stackable tables and chairs will be provided. Phasing All on and off site improvements (excluding landscaping, the final lift of pavements and the slurry coat of Merrydale) and Buildingsl-4, i.e. those buildings north of Private Street A, will be completed in Building Phase 1. Building Phase 2 comprising Buildings 5-9, south of Private Street A will follow. All construction will be completed within +/- 2.5 years from issuance of the first building permit subject to market condition remaining positive. Two phases of building construction are required given the size of the Project and the possibility of market conditions deteriorating. The following is a preliminary estimate of the schedule: Start Prephase Spring 2020 Substantially Complete Prephase Summer 2020 Start Building Phase 1 Summer 2020 Start Building Phase 2 Summer 2021 Complete Building Phase 1 Fall 2021 Complete Building Phase 2 Summer 2022 Complete Prephase Summer 2022 Tree Removal A total of 43 mature trees of varying condition are located on the Project site and one tree that is dead. All trees have been proposed for removal except the grove of Redwoods on the northwest and northeast corners of the Project site, three on the south property line and the Bishop Pines and Coast Live Oak at the Redwood Highway entry. The trees proposed for removal are highlighted on the Tree Inventory. There is a total of 28 trees proposed for removal. Initial Study/CEQA Review All requested studies have been submitted updated as appropriate for the Initial Study to commence. Summary 14 The project will provide 45 much needed workforce for -sale townhomes and stacked flats of varying size, that should be very attractive to a wide variety of home buyers. In addition, the Project will provide a Community Room with outdoor community gathering space, and a dual - use Creek Promenade with activity areas. The Project will start the transformation of the north end of the Merrydale Road/Redwood Highway corridor close to the SMART station from commercial to residential in character. 15 CIO WP ;u m 0 m m cy C-15 PO C7) A EXHIBIT 3 Cw AMH a0OM03H S a � e ' ur+rnur a� 3lb'aAalf3W 1 C- J• O• �. fn A A ^ (\ l D Z n D v «i S b J m r 5' o T R •b �C ANwtiN�� � G nv �&a o I+ I+ I+ I+ OQ CIl e .. F Z, S g g rn 3$ _-A 1 I+ f+ I+ a I d m sod Gi31 s � N � m m _ m o -V cin Cw AMH a0OM03H S a � e ' ur+rnur a� 3lb'aAalf3W .I 5 AMH 000Ma3a C- J• O• O A A A A A A A A n v «i S L.1L7 q� .I 5 AMH 000Ma3a c Loi sn n v Im q� 5' o T R •b �C ANwtiN�� � S� N nv �&a o I+ I+ I+ I+ .. g S g g 3$ 1+ 1 I+ f+ I+ a I d m sod Gi31 m m $ c . Sc=c nD nn as d a x � n X x x ill TT�p noD m a m tDJ (q n N N w w N F : � SJ N : N wWcncoWcncn V 012n-PWNj T W -t (Tm Tw�RC m m a R. Z- g ff n dew T C. d � T siaaa a_a_n_a_ D_v_a_a_ oG.d W W N C a m W^ m Q 6 mr � 9 0 0 o o . n o 0 0 0 0 `c o cn o w ^� m y N� Q A N m N T d N m .C,-. C C) V N ( f9 �1 DDD h D? D Y v >> v N N w �l� t' AWN 1occm� rncnAw cn(z0 co I- p�uW nC') ra n O �O `r t0 t0 �G m > > = N Cy9 c�'i w w s m m w go 19 S<og v ow O 6 N 23. O a O r v. n w b c�tt? N rn en A WN �1 •4 EXHIBIT 4 D Tn tV 1l sR $�B R beS S y' Q u cRI �,f Of � Iy 1 11 � y',¢ � 5 C a� a g a cQ 'pSIu8¢�§� u e t � o 9 $ sR $�B R beS S y' Q u cRI �,f Of � Iy 1 11 � y',¢ � 5 C a� a g a cQ 'pSIu8¢�§� u pill sR $�B R beS S y' Q u cRI �,f Of � Iy 1 11 � y',¢ � 5 C a� a g a pill t � o 9 $ w C � ^' O a e � N S' S � s : n lip C a� t � o 9 $ w C � ^' O � N S' N Fn a S C..3 O � c s N® _ s CIO 7t:. 7t:. aN s a L�,7 ➢ fv 2 6IERRYOALc" ROAD AMH000M03H � � m ' WH ❑00M03a 2 Q 3 m 3 _ b � 2 3 vn 0 a > m r . n v I� + 1 C.ti Q m Z C ZG O O c O p p a x > nZ O a ° vzi m x nmo C z r 4p m m mo mZ O -ri cmn T w L7 v m W c [�i D x m m m m m m 0 om Z ❑ b 1 � Q cn m C7 0-- z D � o --t o C3 03 z mo f7 m xd x C.ti Q m Z C ZG O O c O 'n° zA Q`m �� D a 0� -m m m m m X31 b 1 1l a A m ry�Z} c c m 7 m_ Z r a 6 6 o f/J Ui (A GI m m 0 cn m C7 0-- z D � o --t o C3 03 z mo f7 m xd x a 0 I � cn � m .J 1_�r��v J •�y MERNYQALE ROAD 'Y` 'rf_IF "r _. _. _.�- iyAI - Fa ET I xr O RI "C C) 0 Q C C/) a 0 I � cn � m .J 1_�r��v J •�y MERNYQALE ROAD 'Y` 'rf_IF "r _. _. _.�- iyAI - Fa ET I rn C* -3� m m > cn= C:) -o Fn— DO m Do i > m m m ii mii m 1 m 0 rri C) m M cn m M:5 m -m% m Di <:E m D71 C) O o > Ul. �li C) 0 � rn C* -3� m m > cn= C:) -o Fn— DO m Do i > m m m ii mii m 1 m 0 rri C) m M cn m M:5 m -m% m Di <:E m D71 C) O © m CO3 m C)Z zo n m C m z n Cl) m m � r r � N D r C m A p m rnQ .� m CD C � -Z4 c � o = r z v m m D r r N m I I¢2 m 77 m © m CO3 m C)Z zo n m C m z n Cl) m m � r r � N D r C m A p m rnQ .� m CD C � -Z4 c � o = r z v m m D r r N al €Fg �mp$�S FF � � ®� CC55„JJJ11 E g �e =?s'gb�g �r �s $s=e^a�ss�m�a fssxz A g s g N g c 9 511' va $�� IO a'ea zees ���3edj�i 8� €agg M v xg �€ P a g ay$egPs€na�yae� eF� F� mi•R m s n sasgPa D xg s^§� 9€msEEa4s�;�'$p�„ k9m4"a $s��ga'g8�$a=N 5-gzuo Q I og Ra I HE g9n o EEEE:EE {.&;EE�.¢EFE.E:E.4EEsE., ; 4 m m ImaP,9 k. rtmc� a m e M i RRYDALE ROAD z m� Ej r M4�p �my m y�x �r M .11 e^�•eee�ee�.�rt w � ' ice! ��, :-... .d ��. � ' � � •iii will�l� hl� Fil •fid, 0000 Li u td M4�p �my m y�x �r M la ROAD 14 x 34 CD W W `t r MI �e Ise aR&w iso ppQc a S jig Tailg � - ___ p,s� < 9i-{- - 1 / F Tt �,t�S j s� • a�.. `717 �1 „ I 4�3 E7a jr u _ -- 6 7 t7 � •er fie 77 i 6 E e `3 ib e ' iza @ s lip, . rl° + it i, 17 i e r7 P b t' 9 ej I ,r i x7��3K E � r • r �str7 — arees 4P�tSN 7 y ! `; S 3• • • ` p e7 37 ' 3 a7 cb [Oa' " '4111:11111, 66611�b j�P3��R@K7�G6 • i727,•s��¢;oro. 2��������� b M �:s111,'fill, '4¢ S�i4jj i:r PYS �.®afoo OQ2 e ='4` 17�7t z es ae sj 6 6 O ����� pp•� n�� � yy EXHIBIT 5 Tree Inventory 3833 Redwood Highway, San Rafael, CA. TREE INVENTORY 3833 Redwood Highway, San Rafael, CA. canal east Pinus muricata Bishop Pine 10.7 7 -Jun -19 Tree DATE Location Species Common Name DBH (in.) Canopy Condition Decay Defects Comments Num. borers Arbor at height Rating location structure impact conflict by building Entrance gate at sidewalk. & Juniper occidentalis Western Juniper 13.4 50 fair n/a Thin canopy, Calif. native 1 1/21/2018 drainage canal Pinus muricata Bishop Pine 17.3 40 good n/a none, necessary 6 1/21/2018 East Parking lot Entrance gate at Coast Live Oak 6+2.1+2+2+ 45 good n/a none Multi stem tree Calif. Native Thin canopy Calif. native 2 1/21/2018 drainage canal Pinus muricata Bishop Pine 13.5 40 fair n/a none East Parking lot Sequoia Coastal Redwood Entrance gate at 48 good n/a none Calif. native tree lanter bed Single trunk tree Calif. 1/21/2018 drainage canal Quercus Coast Live Oak 3.1 13 good n/a None native 11.2 45 Entrance gate at n/a none Calif. native tree lanter bed Dead 1/21/2018 drainage canal Quercus Coast Live Oak 3.1 13 good n/a none 22 good Along drainage none 2 stems, Calif native lanter bed pitch flow Browning needles =1 1/21/2018 canal east Pinus muricata Bishop Pine 10.7 40 poor n/a & pine throughout canopy remove property borers Arbor at structure impact conflict by building 5 1/21/2018 sidewalk. & Juniper occidentalis Western Juniper 13.4 50 fair n/a conflict arbor & trunk removal building necessary 6 1/21/2018 East Parking lot Quercus Coast Live Oak 6+2.1+2+2+ 45 good n/a none Multi stem tree Calif. Native lanter bed 2 7 1/21/2018 East Parking lot Sequoia Coastal Redwood 12.5 48 good n/a none Calif. native tree lanter bed B 1/21/2018 East Parking lot Sequoia Coastal Redwood 11.2 45 good n/a none Calif. native tree lanter bed 9 1/21/2018 East Parking lot Quercus Coast Live Oak 2.5+3 22 good n/a none 2 stems, Calif native lanter bed 10 1/21/2018 East Parking lot Sequoia Coastal Redwood 13.3 45 good n/a none Calif. native tree lanter bed 11 1/21/2018 East Parking lot Sequoia Coastal Redwood 3.5 6 good n/a none Calif. native tree lanter bed 1/21/2018 Northeast corner Deciduous Calif. native tree 12 at drainage canal Quercus White Oak 16.3 67 good n/a stressed „ 3 1/21/2018 Planter bed Sequoia Coastal Redwood 18.2+18.7 80 good n/a none Double stem, Calif, native arkin lot tree Northeast corner single stem tree Calif. native 14 at drainage canal Sequoia Coastal Redwood 24.7 55 good n/a none 1/21/2018 Northeast corner Invasive roots Remove to m _' 3,8 I at drainage canal Liquid Amber Sweet Gum 5.8 40 ok n/a none allow for Redwood development 1/21/2018 Northeast corner Invasive roots Remove to 1fi at drainage canal Liquid Amber Sweet Gum 8 40 ok n/a none allow for Redwood 1/21/2018 Mid parking lot Multi stem at 3 ft. DBH 17 north planter Lagerstroemia Crape Myrtle 6.7+5.5+5.7 30 ok n/a one 1/21/2018 Page 1 of 4 Tree Inventory 3833 Redwood Highway, San Rafael, CA. 1/21/2018 Mid parking lot 2 main stems 18 north planter Lagerstroemia Crape Myrtle 8.5 25 ok n/a none Mid parking lot 2 main stems fr. Base of 19 1/21/2018 north planter Lagerstroemla Crape Myrtle 6+4 27 ok n/a none tree Mid parking lot 20 1/21/2018 north planter Lagerstroemia Crape Myrtle 4+8.5 25 ok n/a none Planter bed 2 compacted stems to be 21 1/21/2018 parking lot Sequoia Coastal Redwood 23+16 98 good n/a none removed (5" & 6" dial. to Merrydale Rd. allow for main trunks deyploompnt Planter bed 2 Trunks fr. Base Calif. 22 1/21/2018 parking lot Sequoia Coastal Redwood 21.5+9.4 98 good n/a none Native tree Merrydale Rd. Planter bed good n/a single stem tree Calif. 23 1/21/2018 parking lot Sequoia Coastal Redwood 25.5 98 none native Menydale Rd. Redwood Tree Group at Merrydale Rd. Bridge Group located Calif. native trees, group 24 1/21/2018 before Sequoia Coastal Redwood 12.8,5,16.7, 98-100 good n/a none may be all one tree Merrydale Rd. 9.8 connected root system. Group located 25 1/21/2018 before Sequoia Coastal Redwood 22.8 98 good n/a none Calif. Native tree. Merrydale Rd. hridgp Group located 26 1/21/2018 before Sequoia Coast Redwood 24 98 good n/a none Calif. Native tree. Merrydale Rd. bridge Group located 27 1/21/2018 before Sequoia Coastal Redwood 21 98 good n/a none Calif. Native tree. Merrydale Rd. hredgp Group located 28 1/21/2018 before Sequoia Coastal Redwood 18 98 good n/a none Calif. Native tree. Merrydale Rd. bridep Group located 29 1/21/2018 before Sequoia Coastal Redwood 24.8 98 good n/a none Calif. Native tree. Merrydale Rd. hrodgp Merrydale Road frontage trees Merrydale Rd. Tree is in planter strip with between building tall hedge dividing sidewalk 30 1/21/2018 sidewalk Acer Maple 9 12 fair stressed none and Merrydale Rd. Trees are insignificant. Page 2 of 4 Tree Inventory 3833 Redwood Highway, San Rafael, CA. Page 3 of 4 Merrydale Rd. Tree is in planter strip with between building tall hedge dividing sidewalk 3 1/21/2018 sidewalk Acer Maple 5 12 poor stressed none and Merrydale Rd. Trees are ! i Insignificant. Merrydale Rd. Tree is in planter strip with between building tall hedge dividing sidewalk 32 1/21/2018 sidewalk Acer Maple 5 fair none and Merrydale Rd. Trees are I insignificant. Merrydale Rd. stressed 3.3 1/21/2018 between building Prunus Flower ornamental 11,10.5 8 fair/poor condition none Tree is out grown limited sidewalk Cherry limited snare space. Merrydale Rd. between building stressed 34 1/21/2018 sidewalk against s Prunus Flower ornamental 24 24 fair/poor condition none Buckling sidewalk conflict utility pole Cherry limited with utility pole space ;1/21/2018 Flowering ornamental Fair Pruning maintenance 35 Front side yard Pyrus 20 35 none necessary remove broken pear branches. Front side yard next to Conflict with chain link �` 1/21/2018 neighboring Pyrus Flowering ornamental 15 25 Fair location none fence. Remove to eliminate Electric shop pear conflict conflict 3817A Merrydale South Property Line Trees 38 6/7/2019 South Property Prunus Ornamental Pear or 4.4,4,1.5" 20 ft. good conflict fence deadwood remove deadwood Line Cherry wal 39 6/7/2019 South Property Prunus Ornamental Pear or 5.8,2.5" 15 ft. fair lower Confined space Line Cherry deadwood 40 6/7/2019 South Property Prunus Ornamental Pear or Line Cherry South Property 42 6/7/2019 Line right angle Linden 17.5" 45 ft. good n/a good prune deadwood fence line 43 6/7/2019 South Property Legustrum privet 4.5.5" 30 ft fair Conflict pushing property Line line fence 44 6/7/2019 South Property Pistacla Chinese pistache is., 25 ft verypoor trunk dieback best removed Line canopy severe Wound 45 6/7/2019 South Property Populus European Wt. Poplar 19 inches 35 ft. fair scar west wound Mis labeled Maple tree Line side trunk healing pruning for deadwood &limb Page 3 of 4 Tree Inventory 3833 Redwood Highway, San Rafael, CA. 'indicates 1�3 Proposed for Removal Page 4 of 4 d rW� V 1-3 �-a . co c� d � ca 0 0 d c� la,. AA �i f� y44L=M yy T f JWF h i4 �i f� y44L=M yy T f JWF i. �i f� y44L=M yy T f JWF Caron Parker From: Cathy Manovi <cathy.manovi@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2019 4:08 PM To: Caron Parker Subject: 350 Merrydale Condos, comments for your staff report Dear Carone, Thanks for the invitation to send comments for inclusion in your staff report on this project, which will have a hearing by the DRB on August 6. I am a neighbor from the Rafael Meadows neighborhood, with concerns about the traffic, parking, walkability --or lack thereof when referring to Merydale--, and the general aesthetics of Merrydale. There has been a lot of infill development along Merrydale in the last couple of decades: Redwood Village and other apartments between N San Pedro and the freeway on/off ramps. None of these look anything like the project proposed for 350 Merrydale. I liked the layout and plan for how the buildings will be placed on the site, but I am not a fan of the look of the proposed buildings' exterior, which resemble boxes put together and look more like a mall exterior. I wonder if somehow that impression could be lessened by design tweaks to the roofline so that the roof overhangs the corners of the building and those in between, rather than those boxy turret -like protrusions that currently hide the roofline edge. The other thing I have concerns about but forgot to ask at the presentation on Thursday, is how much of a setback is planned from the street, such that a wider sidewalk than currently exists on Merrydale can be built. The reason for this is, although it's not the concern of this developer, it should be for city planners. The entire stretch of Merrydale is in dire need of good walking infrastructure. Any new development should be designed with an increased sidewalk width over what currently exists. It's an opportunity to set a new standard to emulate when Merrydale gets the long overdue multimodal upgrade it deserves given how much infill housing it has absorbed and for being so close to SMART and the Civic Center. Lastly, is the parking. We need to ensure there is little to no parking from the new residents that routinely spills over onto the existing rustic mudpit where overflow parking from the existing apartment buldings is constant, and into the Meadows where there are no sidewalks whatsoever. 2.5 parking spots for a 4 bedroom with multiple baths is likely to result in at least 3 cars for that unit. Mike Cooper said this was also a concern for the infamous Wincup project in Corta Madera, but claims that fear never panned out. I would like some verification of his statement. Do you have any ideas a neutral party who could verify that claim? Those are my comments and concerns. Thank you again for the invitation to send in comments for your upcoming staff report. Cathy Manovi Resident of San Rafael Meadows Neighborhood 415-686-0268 Cell EXHIBIT 7 Caron Parker From: Nathalie Valkov <nat@valkov.com> Sent: .Tuesday, July 17, 2018 5:18 PM To: Caron Parker Subjed; Marydale Road project Hello, I will not be able to attend tonight's meeting but l wanted to share my concerns with you. They are four fold: 1. Privacy. I live at 308 Las Flores ave in a two story house. A three story building with a roof deck will seriously impair my privacy as people on the deck will not only be able to see in my backyard but also in our bedrooms! I would like to make sure the building design does address this issue. 2. Parking. I would like to be sure these townhouses have off street parking. The area is becoming increasingly congested and not having parking on the premises would make matters worse. 3. Traffic. People coming from that side of the street tend to run straight through and not pay attention to the stop sign. I get cut off on a regular basis at the corner of Marydale and Las gallinas. Also one of the selling point of my property is the easy and quick access to the freeway. How would that impact me and the price of my property? 4. Length of construction noise. I work from home most of the time, advising clients who require a calm and peaceful environment. I believe the noise from the construction will impact my business in a very negative way. Furthermore, after having to put up with the noise of the train (construction and testing) for so long, I have seen the impact on my (and my neighbors) quality of life. I do not want a repeat of that as it can impact our health as well. What can be done to alleviate these concerns? Sincerely, Nathalie Valkov