HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRB 2011-08-16 #4
CITY OF
Community Development Department – Planning Division
Meeting Date: August 16, 2011
Case Numbers: CDR11-003; PA11-004
Project Planner: Steve Stafford – (415) 458-5048
REPORT TO DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
SUBJECT: 809 B Street and 1212 and 1214 2nd Street – Conceptual Review requesting preliminary
comments on a proposal to construct a four-story, mixed-use building with 41 residential
apartment units above approximately 1,500 square feet of ground floor commercial retail
space and 57 garage parking spaces on four adjacent lots located at the northwestern corner
of B and 2nd Streets; APNS: 011-256-12, -14, -15 & -32; Second/Third Mixed Use District
West (2/3MUW) and Cross Street Mixed Use District (CSMU) Zones; Tom Monahan,
applicant; Monahan Parker, Inc., Owner; Downtown Activity Center Neighborhood.
PROPERTY FACTS
Site Characteristics
General Plan Designation Zoning Designation Existing Land-Use
Project Site: 2/3 MU 2/3 MUW; CSMU Religious Facility; Parking Lot;
Residences
North: 2/3 MU 2/3 MUW; CSMU Commercial; Residences
South: 2/3 MU 2/3 MUW; CSMU Commercial; Residences
East: 2/3 MU 2/3 MUW Commercial; Residences
West: 2/3 MU 2/3 MUW Residences
Site Development Summary
Lot Size Floor Area Ratio
Required: 2,000 sf / Building (CSMU)
Proposed: 23,614 sf (Combined)
Allowed: 1.50 FAR or 35,421 sf
Proposed: 1,400 sf (Approx.)
Height Density1
Allowed: 42’
Proposed: 42’ (Approx.)
Allowed: 30 units
Proposed: 41 units
Parking2 Landscape (2/3 MUW)
Required: 56 Spaces
Proposed: 57 Covered Garage Spaces
Required: 10% or 1,377 sf
Proposed: 767.5 sf + Unknown Common Outdoor
Area Plantings
Setbacks (2/3 MUW)3
Required Proposed
Front: 5’ (522.5 sf)
Side(s): NA
Street side: NA
Rear: NA
5’ (767.5 sf)
NA
NA
NA
Notes: 1Based on 13,774 sf of site located within 2/3 MUW District at a rate of 1 unit/1,000 sf and 9,840 sf of site located within CSMU District at a
rate of 1unit/600 sf. The concept project includes a 35% density bonus request.
2Downtown Parking Assessment District satisfies on-site parking demand up to 1.0 FAR of non-residential development.
32nd Street frontage must be landscaped .
2
SUMMARY
The project is being referred to the Board for concept review for site and building design improvements.
The project proposes to demolish an existing 5,000 sq. ft. commercial building and two residential
structures, one of which is a known cultural resource, and to construct a new, 41-unit, mixed-use (i.e.,
residential over ground floor commercial), building with 57 garage parking spaces and associated site
and landscape improvements on four adjacent Downtown parcels with a combined lot area of 23,614
sq. ft. When the project is submitted for formal review, it will require an Environmental and Design
Review Permit (Planning Commission or Commission-level), along with Use Permit (residential use in a
commercial district) and Lot Line Adjustment (development across property boundaries) approvals.
As required for all Commission-level, Environmental and Design Review Permits, the applicant has
submitted for conceptual design review to allow the Board to provide early design comments on the
proposed project. The Board’s recommendations will be considered by the applicant for incorporation
as revisions to the project design prior to formal submittal. Based on review of the applicable design
criteria, which is discussed in detail below, Planning staff identified several issues with the project
design. Planning staff requests that the Board review this report and provide recommendations on the
project’s compliance with all pertinent design criteria. Specifically, Planning staff asks the Board to
consider the following:
Architecture
• Whether the proposed contemporary “retro” architectural design of the building is appropriate given
its context with locally listed historic structures along B Street.
• Whether the proposed concept design (architecture, scale, form, exterior materials and colors,
details) adequately ‘relate’ to the predominant design of surround development in the vicinity.
• Whether the proposed design of the building adequately creates a sense of entry to both the ground
floor commercial spaces and the lobby to the upstairs residential units.
Landscaping
• Whether the proposed landscape design is adequate and appropriate, and recommendations to
achieve the required 10% landscape coverage standard.
Parking and Loading
• Recommendations on revisions required to provide the required loading space.
BACKGROUND
Site Description & Setting:
The site is located at the northwest corner of B and Second Streets in the Downtown. It is comprised of
four contiguous parcels containing approximately 23,614 square feet of combined level lot area. It is
currently developed with a single-story commercial building, approximately 4,500 square feet in size, a
private 48-stall parking lot, and two, two-story, residential structures, one of which is a known cultural
resource that is protected under State environmental regulations (Listed as a local historic resource on
the San Rafael Historical/Architectural Survey, updated 1986).
The site is located within the Downtown Parking Assessment District and, for the past 20 years, this
block of B Street has been the focus of continued redevelopment efforts by the City’s Redevelopment
Agency. The St. Vincent De Paul Society dining room is located B Street, east of the site. The 60-unit,
Lone Palm Court apartments are located immediately west of the site. A 12’-wide public right-of-way
(ROW) easement, which provides vehicular and pedestrian access from C Street to the site and
neighboring parcels, borders the northwestern property boundary. An existing mature Palm tree is
located within the 12’-wide ROW easement. The eastern property boundary fronts B Street, which
3
provides a pedestrian link between the Downtown and the Gerstle Park residential neighborhood. The
southern property boundary fronts Second Street, which is a one-way “major” arterial roadway.
History:
The site’s commercial building history includes its original use as a restaurant (“Gonzales’ Hacienda”),
followed by administrative offices for the non-profit Center Point Foundation. In 2004, the Planning
Commission approved a Use Permit (UP04-031) to allow a religious institution or church to occupy the
building as an ‘interim’ use’. In 2009, the church submitted a Use Permit application to operate a
seasonal emergency or “warming” shelter for women, which was later withdrawn due to a lack of
funding.
The two, two-story Victorian-era residences (1212 & 1214 Second Street) were originally constructed
together, circa 1887 – 1894. They were constructed along with a third, late-19th Century, Victorian-
period residence (1218 Second Street) that was later demolished and its property incorporated into
development of the Lone Palm Court housing complex. In 1951, a 210 square-foot storefront addition
was constructed to the residential structure at 1214 Second Street. This commercial addition was used
first as administrative offices and, later, as retail services. The residential use continued until November
15, 2006, when fire damaged the residential structure at 1212 Second Street, rendering it
uninhabitable. Since that time, the City spent significant efforts addressing a reoccurring homeless
encampment issue at 1212 Second Street. The existing residential structure at 1214 Second Street
continues to be legally inhabited.
The Design Review Board (Board) recently reviewed redevelopment proposals for the site, including:
• On May 3, 2005, the Board conducted Conceptual Design Review (PA04-006) of a project that
proposed demolition of all structures on the four, commonly-owned parcels and construction of 20,
three-story, residential condominium townhomes, within four buildings, with ground floor parking
and 4,100-square feet of commercial space. At that time, the Board expressed favorable support of
the concept.
• On September 19, 2006, the Board reviewed a formal project (ED05-091/UP05-042/SR05-066) for
the site. The project was greatly reduced since the Board’s preliminary review, and proposed a
single, two-story, mixed-use building over two of the four contiguous parcels, with four residential
condominium units above 7,500 square feet of ground floor commercial space and 15 uncovered
parking spaces. The redevelopment project was reduced as a result of multiple cultural resource
evaluations conducted by the property owner and peer reviewed by the City. This resulted in the
determination by the City that at least one of the existing Victorian-era residential structures (1212
Second Street) is protected by CEQA (Californian Environmental Quality Act). Specifically, the
residential structure at 1212 Second Street was listed on the San Rafael Historical/Architectural
Survey as a ‘local’ cultural resource and determined to have provided worker housing during
construction and operation of the North Pacific Coast Railroad; which maintained a passenger
station and freight house until the late 1950s at the southeast corner of the intersection of B and
Second Streets (behind the current Flatiron Saloon located at 724 B Street), less than one block
away. The redevelopment project would continue to demolish the existing single-story commercial
building at the northwest corner of B and Second Streets.
At that time, the Board again thought the reduced project was well designed, though they requested
more attention to building articulation and fenestration, more generous site landscaping, and
removal of a secondary driveway exit onto Second Street. The Board continued their review to
allow the applicant an opportunity to explore possible revisions to the project.
On March 12, 2008, after 18 months of inactivity on the formal applications, the City deemed the
project automatically withdrawn.
4
• On March 3, 2009, the Board again conducted Conceptual Design Review (PA09-002) of a project
that proposed demolition of all structures on the four, commonly-owned parcels and construction of
a three-story, mixed-use building at the corner of B and Second Streets, with two floors of office
space (15,316 sq. ft.) above ground floor parking (38 parking stalls; both ‘garage’ and uncovered
parking spaces) and retail space (4,400 sq. ft.). The project again proposed to demolish all existing
structures on the combined site, including at least one known historic structure /cultural resource
located at 1212 Second Street.
At that time, the Board continued their review, expressing concern that the project site and building
design were driven more by the desire to maximize parking on-site rather than creating site and
building design that is appropriate for the site and the vicinity. The Board believed the proposed site
design and, specifically, the proposed parking lot layout, eliminated opportunities to make
improvements to the building design necessary to provide better context with the locally-listed
historic structures located within the vicinity.
• On January 25, 2010, the applicant submitted a formal project to the City, proposing, essentially,
the same project though the site design was revised to reduce on-site parking from 38 to 33 parking
spaces and to provide more generous site landscaping while the building design was improved to
provide more attention to building articulation and fenestration.
The Board never reviewed the formal project design. Planning staff provided the applicant with a
Letter of Incompleteness and spent significant time working with the applicant to obtain the
additional information and details still needed prior to review by the Board. On January 26, 2011,
after 12 months of inactivity on the formal applications, the City deemed the project automatically
withdrawn.
.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Use:
The Conceptual Design Review proposes to construct a four-story, mixed-use building with 41 ‘rental’
residential units or apartments, 57, at-grade, garage parking spaces, and approximately 1,400 sq. ft. of
commercial retail space located at the northwest corner of B and Second Streets. The proposed
configuration of residences include 15, one-bedroom/one-bathroom units, 810 sq. ft. in size and 26,
two-bedroom/two-bathroom units, 1,040 sq. ft. in size. The concept project includes a 35% density
bonus request.
Site Plan:
The project proposes to demolish all three existing structures on four adjacent lots, including a single-
story, 4,500 sq. ft., commercial building located at the corner of B and Second Streets and two, two-
story, Victorian-era residences along Second Street, one of which is a local cultural resource. The
project proposes to concentrate redevelopment at the southeast corner of the site, at the intersection of
B and Second Streets. Pedestrian access to the ground floor retail tenant areas and the lobby area to
the upper-story residences would be along the B Street elevation. A secondary means of
egress/ingress for residents would be located along the Second Street elevation, at the western
property boundary.
Vehicle access to the site would be off B Street, through a secured, 26’-wide, two-way driveway located
along the north property boundary line. This driveway would be located 85’ north of the intersection at B
and Second Streets. The project also proposes 57, covered parking spaces on the ground floor,
including 47, 90° parking spaces, eight tandem parking spaces and two perpendicular parking spaces.
.
Architecture:
5
The project proposes a contemporary ‘retro’ design, predominantly characterized by ‘floor-to-ceiling’
aluminum glass windows on all upper-story units and deep aluminum cornice and ground-floor canopy
projections. The project proposes a flat roof form and wide, vertically-oriented, terra cotta tile façade
treatments along both the B and Second Street frontages. Along the B Street elevation, the project
proposes storefront windows and recessed entries to the ground floor commercial space and the lobby
area to the residential units above.
The layout of the project proposes that all upper-story residential units to be accessed from an open,
three-story, central landscaped courtyard. An additional open, landscaped outdoor common terrace is
proposed on the first residential floor along the northwestern property boundary, adjacent to existing
mature Palm tree which is to be preserved. Each one-bedroom unit is proposed to be provided with a
65 sq. ft., covered private balcony and each two-bedroom unit is proposed to be provided with a 145
sq. ft., covered private balcony, a majority of which will front either B or Second Streets. Two, two-
bedroom units along the first residential floor propose to provide 280 sq. ft., partially open private
patios.
Landscaping:
All existing landscaping is proposed to be removed from the project site. The project submittals include
a site plan with only conceptual landscaping shown. The project concentrates landscaping primarily
along the Second Street frontage by continuing the existing required 5’ landscape setback provided by
the adjacent Lone Palm Court apartment site design. The project proposes a ‘green-screen’ landscape
wall for ground floor garage along Second Street. Additionally, the project proposes to install landscape
trees within the, approximately 2,500 sq. ft., central courtyard (above the proposed podium parking
area) and on an open terrace, approximately 800 sq. ft. in size, located on the first residential floor
(along the northwestern property boundary). The project proposes to either replace and/or preserve the
existing street trees within the sidewalk along both B and Second Streets. The existing mature, 36”-
diameter, Palm tree located within an adjacent 12’-wide, City easement strip along the northwestern
property boundary, will be preserved.
ANALYSIS
General Plan 2020 Consistency:
The General Plan land use designation for the site is Second/Third Street Mixed Use (2/3MU). The
2/3MU designation allows office and office-support retail and service uses, and encourages
neighborhood serving and specialty retail uses on cross streets to facilitate an active pedestrian
environment, especially west of B Street. Residential uses are also encouraged on cross streets,
especially west of B Street. The project’s proposed uses are consistent with Land Use Policy LU-23
(Land Use Map and Categories) and the project’s proposed 42-foot building is in accordance with Land
Use Policy LU-12 (Building Height). Staff requests the Board’s guidance in evaluating the project for
consistency with the following design- and historic preservation-related General Plan Policies:
• NH-7 (Neighborhood Identity and Landmarks) seeks to enhance neighborhood identity and
sense of community by retaining and creating gateways, landmarks, and landscape
improvements that help to define neighborhood entries and focal points.
• NH-15 (Downtown Vision) seeks to design infill office and residential development to be
compatible with existing neighborhood qualities, including landscaped front yards and historic
building characteristics.
• NH-29 (Downtown Design) requires new and remodeled buildings in the Downtown to
incorporate design elements that are compatible with and enhance the Downtown’s identity and
complement the existing attractive environment. These design considerations include: 1) Varied
and distinctive building designs; 2) Sensitive treatment of historic structures; 3) Generous
landscaping to accent buildings; 4) Appropriate materials and construction; and 5) Site design
and streetscape continuity.
6
• NH-32 (Historic Character) encourages new development on sites in the Downtown area to be
compatible with nearby historic buildings, the historic Downtown street pattern and the area’s
historic, pedestrian-oriented character.
• NH-33 (Downtown’s Neighbors) seeks to distinguish Downtown from adjoining neighborhood
areas by, among other goals, providing a gradual transition into adjacent residential
neighborhoods in terms of building scale and intensity of use.
• NH-40 (d) and (e) (Second/Third Mixed-Use District) seeks to make Second and Third Streets a
very attractive, safe and efficient transportation corridor through the Downtown by reducing the
number of driveways that interrupt sidewalks, and develop attractive, screened, easy-to-find
public and private parking areas serving the Fourth Street Retail Core and the Second/Third
Street Corridor.
• NH-41 (Second/Third Mixed District Design Considerations) encourages the creation of an
attractive, creative and varied architecture on Second and Third Streets, with design detail on all
sides of buildings visible to the street or pedestrians. Additionally, A, B, C and D Streets are
important pedestrian links between the Downtown and surrounding residential neighborhood.
Special treatment should be given along B Street as an area of strong historic character.
• CD-2 (Neighborhood Identity) seeks to maintain the urban, historic, and pedestrian character of
the Downtown while preserving and enhancing the scale and landscaped character of the City’s
residential neighborhoods.
• 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-4 (Historic Resources) seeks to protect San Rafael’s positive and distinctive image by
recognizing, preserving and enhancing the City’s historic resources.
• CD-9 (Transportation Corridors) seeks to improve the function and appearance of corridor by
addressing building massing, articulation of building facades, detailing, lighting, landscaping,
street trees and other desired infrastructure improvements.
• CD-10 (Nonresidential Design Guidelines) recognizes preserves and enhances the design
elements that contribute to the economic vitality of commercial areas. New nonresidential and
mixed-use development should fit with and improve the immediate neighborhood and the
community as a whole.
• CD-18 (Landscaping) recognizes landscaping as a significant component of all site design.
Planning staff believes there are General Plan consistency issues with the concept design in terms of
architectural context with adjacent historic structures. The San Rafael Historic/Architectural Survey lists
a high concentration of historically significant structures or protected cultural resources within the
immediate vicinity of the site, including seven sites alone within the same 700-block of B Street. Across
the street from the site, both the southwestern and southeastern corners of B and Second Streets have
listed historic structures or cultural resources, including 724 B Street (the ‘Flatiron Building’), which is
also a designated “landmark’. Staff will require additional information and details at formal application
submittal – including a cultural resource assessment/historic resource study, visual simulations, a
geotechnical investigation report and a traffic study – to assess whether the proposed project meets the
applicable General Plan policies.
Staff requests that the Board comment on the following:
7
• Whether the proposed contemporary ‘retro’ design adequately respects the neighborhood’s unique
design (architecture, form, scale, materials and color, etc.) qualities, which is predominantly two-
story, historic structures.
Zoning Ordinance Consistency:
Chapter 5 – Commercial and Office Districts
The site is split zoned; the site is subject to the development standards for the Cross Street Mixed Use
(CSMU) and Second/Third Mixed Use West (2/3 MUW) Districts, pursuant to Chapter 5 of the San
Rafael Municipal Code (the Zoning Ordinance). Those property development standards applicable to
the project are identified in the Site Development Summary matrix located on the front of this report.
As conceptually designed, the proposed project appears to comply with all applicable property
development standards for the CSMU and 2/3 MUW Districts, including maximum building height and
minimum landscaping requirement.
Chapter 16 – Site and Use Regulations
Affordable Housing Requirement
Under both the City’s General Plan (Land Use Policy LU-23; Land Use Map and Categories) and
Zoning Ordinance (Section 14.05.032; Property development Standards for Downtown Commercial
Districts), the maximum allowable density on the site is 30 residential units. Both the City’s General
Plan (Housing Policy H-19; Inclusionary Housing Requirement) and Zoning Ordinance (Section
14.16.030; Affordable Housing Requirement) further require that housing projects, which propose more
than 20 new units, provide 20% of the total units at ‘below market rates’ (BMR units) for a minimum of
55 years. Based on the 20% “affordability” requirement, the project would be required to provide 6 BMR
units (20% x 30 units = 6 units). The concept project proposes 41 rental units and does not provide
specific details on the number of BMR units. Furthermore, no details were provided to explain how the
concept project proposes to meet the City’s affordable housing requirement. For rental units, a
minimum of 50% of the required BMR units shall be made affordable to very low-income households at
50-80% of the median County income, with the remainder affordable to low-income households at 80-
120% of the median County income level.
If the formal application submittals were to propose that 5 of the 6 required BMR units would be made
affordable to very-low income households, and the remaining required BMR unit would be made
available to low-income households, the project would be eligible for up to a 35% density bonus or 10.5
additional market-rate units and one concession or incentive. Fractional density units are rounded up to
the highest whole number; therefore, the maximum number of density units allowed for the project is 11
additional market-rate units or 41 total units. Thus, it is possible for the concept project to achieve the
proposed density.
The concept project also proposes eight tandem garage parking spaces, which is prohibited by the
City’s Parking Standards (Section 14.18.120) unless granted as a concession or incentive for meeting
the affordable housing requirement. The use of tandem parking as a concession under the under the
State Density Bonus law will need to be requested. The concept project indicates that, at formal
application submittal, a request will be made to reduce the number of BMR units proposed; however,
any request for reduction of the number of BMR units provided by the project will have consequences
on both number of ‘density units’ and any concessions or incentives available to the applicants.
Chapter 18 – Parking Standards
The site is located within both the Downtown and the City’s Downtown Parking Assessment District.
The Downtown Parking Assessment District essentially allocates all non-residential parking demand for
the project, up to 1.0 of Floor Area Ratio (FAR), among Downtown public parking lots and structures.
8
All non-residential parking demand for the project above 1.0 FAR shall meet the City’s on-site parking
requirements, pursuant to Chapter 18 of the Zoning Ordinance. Further, all on-site parking may meet
reduced standards for Downtown development, including a reduced parking rate (1 space per 300
gross building square footage) and reduced parking space dimensions (8.5’ x 18’). For residential
development, new one-bedroom units in the Downtown shall provide one on-site parking space and
new two-bedroom units, 900 sq. ft. or greater in size, shall provide 1.5 parking spaces.
As proposed, the concept design is generally consistent with the City’s parking requirements with the
exception of the tandem parking spaces, which requires the granting of a concession by the City under
the State Density bonus law, as discussed above. Surrounding Downtown public parking lots and
structures accommodate the approximately 1,400 sq. ft. of non-residential FAR proposed. The City’s
parking standards require that the project provide 56 on-site parking spaces to meet the residential
parking demand, which may meet reduced Downtown dimensions and may be either covered or
uncovered; the concept project proposes 57 on-site garage or covered parking spaces.
As proposed, the concept design appears to comply with the following parking standards:
• Minimum Downtown parking stall dimensions, both ‘90°’ (8.5’ x 18’) and ‘parallel’ (8.5’ x 22’)
space designs;
• Minimum aisle width or minimum parking space backup area (26’);
• Minimum driveway access width (26’);
• End of drive aisle parking stall access extension (2’);
• Guest parking (None required in Downtown unless within 200’ of a residential district); and
• Screening of all parking areas visible from public streets to headlight height through the use of
landscaped earth berms, low walls, fencing, vegetation hedges or combination of trees and
shrub plantings (Concept design proposes ‘green screen’ landscape wall at ground floor garage
along the Second Street frontage);
The formal application submittal will be required to meet the following additional requirements:
• One, off-street loading and unloading space with minimum dimensions of 10’ in width, 35’ in
length and 14’ in height clearance, which may be incorporated into a drive aisle if adequate
backup distance is provide as determined by the City’s Traffic Engineer;
• Adequate bicycle parking which meets the design standards of Section 14.18.090 (C) of the
Zoning Ordinance; and
• Parking garage and exterior building lighting designed to provide adequate minimum
illumination levels of:
a) One (1) foot candle at ground level overlap shall be provided in all exterior doorways and in
all vehicle parking areas; and
b) Minimum one-half (1/2) foot candle at ground level overlap shall be provided along all
outdoor pedestrian walkways.
Chapter 19 – Signs
The City’s Sign Ordinance (Section 14.19.047; Environmental and design Review Permit) requires all
signage shall be incorporated into the design of new commercial or mixed-use (with ground floor
commercial) buildings subject to Environmental and Design Review Permits.
No details are provided in the concept project on how the project proposes to meet the sign needs for
the ground floor commercial space. The formal project will be required to provide proposed sign details
at the time of application submittal. As designed, it appears that the building signage would include a
building ID sign with under marquee and window signage for the commercial retail tenants.
Chapter 25 – Environmental and Design Review Permit
The concept project requires an Environmental and Design Review Permit given that it proposes to
construct a new multifamily residential structure, with three or more units. The project is subject to the
review criteria for Environmental and Design Review Permits, pursuant to Section 14.25.050 (Review
Criteria; Environmental and Design Review Permits) of the Zoning Ordinance, as follows:
9
• 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.
• 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.
• Signs. Signs shall be designed consistent with the guidelines of the City’s Sign Ordinance, pursuant
to Chapter 14.19 of the Zoning Ordinance.
• 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 site is located at the corner of B Street, an active pedestrian link to the Downtown, and Second
Street, an active vehicular corridor to U.S. Highway 101. This large, high-profile location provides the
project with a unique opportunity to do “something special” during its redevelopment. This is also a
particularly difficult site for redevelopment, primarily due to the high concentration of historic
structures/cultural resources within the immediate vicinity and the Secretary of the Interior Standards
which protect these by requiring that new development complement or be compatible with, and not
detract from, the historic character of these surrounding sites. Additionally, 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 existing in the
vicinity.
Planning staff believes that the proposed concept design of the building should better respect the
attention to predominant detailing found on these historic structures within the vicinity, such as
proposing horizontal wood exterior siding, double-hung casement windows, and greater cornice and
window detailing. Planning staff further believes greater attention to scale is in order. Specifically,
Planning staff believes the concept project would relate better with the existing development that
surrounds if the proposed building were reduced in height and/or broken up among more than one
building. Existing surrounding development is primarily two-story structures with the exception of the
10
Lone Palm Court apartment complex, which is a relatively new redevelopment project and located
along C Street. Staff requests the Board’s comments on the following:
• Whether the proposed concept design adequately respects the historic character of surrounding
historic structures/cultural resources.
• Whether the proposed concept design adequately relates to the predominant design (architecture,
form, scale, materials and color, etc) of existing buildings in the vicinity.
San Rafael Design Guidelines:
On November 15, 2004, the City Council adopted (by Resolution No. 11667) the interim San Rafael
Design Guidelines to give the 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 provide a framework of design principals that builds on the strength of the existing character
of an area and that strives to improve the visual unity of the area. Planning staff requests the Board’s
guidance in evaluating the project for consistency with the following applicable Downtown-specific and
historic building design guidelines:
Downtown Design Guidelines
Active Pedestrian and Commercial Streets
The B Street elevation of the project site is located within the boundaries of the Active Pedestrian and
Commercial Streets area of the Downtown, where the following specific design guidelines apply:
• The front and street side facades of the ground floor should extend to the property line, with the
exception of public plazas, courtyards or landscape setbacks.
• Driveway cuts and widths should be minimized and ground level parking should be placed
behind buildings.
• Ground floor entries should be frequent, well-defined and well lit for pedestrian safety.
• Large storefront display windows should be provided at the street level (i.e., approximately 75%
of clear glass on the primary street level frontage.
• Building design should provide interest and variety at the street level through awnings, entries
and display windows.
• Provide difference in façade treatment between the ground level and upper levels to add visual
interest to the building and the pedestrian experience.
• Heights should be minimized through methods such as building colors, upper-story stepbacks,
and placing rooftop mechanical equipment under eaves.
Second/Third and Environs
The Second Street elevation of the project site is located within the boundaries of the Second/Third and
Environs area of the Downtown, where the following specific design guidelines apply:
• To provide visual interest, long and monotonous walls should be avoided.
• Building walls should be articulated.
• To create a boulevard effect, varied landscape setbacks are appropriate.
• Additional high-canopy, traffic-tolerant street trees are strongly encouraged
• Parking lots should be landscaped between the street and the parking area.
• Driveway cuts and widths should be minimized to prevent vehicular conflicts.
11
Historic / Architectural Significant Building Design Guidelines
Additionally, the project site is located within close proximity of identified historic/architecturally
significant structures, where the following specific design guidelines apply:
• New buildings, additions or major remodels in the vicinity of a building in the Survey should
respect the pattern, scale and design of the older building, and not create visual distractions.
• Provide an appropriate transition in height between low rise and taller buildings, through
example, careful use of building stepbacks and variable roof heights.
• Windows should be properly proportioned and upper story windows should be vertically aligned
with windows and doors on the ground floor.
• On streets with a concentration of older buildings that have a well-defined design pattern or
rhythm, preserve and complement horizontal building lines, such as cornice lines and window
frames of adjacent architecturally significant buildings.
• On streets with a concentration of older buildings that have a well-defined design pattern, the
size and proportion of window and door openings should be similar to those of surround
facades.
• On streets with a concentration of older buildings, an infill façade should be composed of
materials similar to adjacent facades and should not stand out against the others.
• Relate new roof forms to those found in the area.
Planning staff has no additional issues or concerns with the site and building design of the project
beyond those listed elsewhere in this report.
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 subject site, the appropriate neighborhood groups (the
Downtown BID, the Gerstle Park Neighborhood Association, and the Federation of San Rafael
Neighborhoods), and all other interested parties, 15 calendar days prior to the date of all meetings,
including this hearing. Additionally, notice was posted on the project site along both B and Second
Street frontages. To date, no comments have been received as a result of this noticing.
CONCLUSION
This application submittal is for a conceptual design review of the project. Conceptual review provides
the applicant with an informal critique and evaluation of the project’s basic design approach. It gives
both the Board and the applicant the opportunity to achieve a quality project. The Board will identify
relevant issues, prioritize concerns and, if possible, develop a consensus as to the appropriateness of
the conceptual design and its compliance with design review criteria and guidelines.
Planning staff is sensitive to the difficulties redeveloping the site presents due to its close proximity to a
high concentration of ‘listed’ historic structures/cultural resources with varied architectural design
(exterior materials, finishes and colors, detail features, etc.); however, any new building on the site will
need to adequately respect, and not detract from, the value of these protected historic or cultural
resources that surround the site. Planning staff believes the proposed contemporary “retro”
architectural design of the concept project may not adequate respect these surrounding ‘listed’ historic
structures/cultural resources. Additionally, Planning staff believes the proposed contemporary “retro”
architectural design of the concept project may not adequate ‘relate’ to the predominant design existing
in the vicinity in terms of architecture, form, scale, and exterior materials or treatments and color.
Staff requests the Board provide direction on the points specified in the Summary section of this report.
12
Staff also requests that the Board comment on the additional plans and materials or information that
the Board would like to see when the proposed project returns for formal review (i.e., landscape,
lighting photometric plans, photomontage, contextual streetscape renderings, section details, etc.).
Following the Board’s comments, the applicant will submit their formal design review permit application.
EXHIBITS
1. Vicinity Map
2. Reduced Project Plans
Full-sized plans have been provided to the DRB members only.
cc: Tom Monahan; Monahan Parker, Inc. – 1101 Fifth Ave., Suite 300, San Rafael, CA 94901
Rick Strauss and Mackenzie Bray; FME Architecture & Design – 500 Montgomery St., San
Francisco, CA 94111
