HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission 2019-08-27 Agenda Packet
AGENDA
SAN RAFAEL PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, August 27, 2019, 7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, 1400 FIFTH AVENUE
SAN RAFAEL, CALIFORNIA
• Any records relating to an Agenda Item, received by a majority or more of the board or commission less than 72 hours before t he meeting, shall be available for inspection in the CDD Dept, at 1400 Fifth
Ave, Third Floor, San Rafael, CA
• Sign Language and interpretation and assistive listening devices may be requested by calling (415) 485-3066 (voice), emailing Lindsay.lara@cityofsanrafael.org, or using the California
Telecommunications Relay Service by dialing “711” at least 72 hours in advance. Copies of documents are available in accessible formats upon request.
• Public transportation to City Hall is available through Golden Gate Transit, Line 22 or 23. Para-transit is available by calling Whistlestop Wheels at (415) 454-0964.
• To allow individuals with environmental illness or multiple chemical sensitivity to attend the meeting/hearing, individuals a re requested to refrain from wearing scented productsTo allow individuals with
environmental illness or multiple chemical sensitivity to attend the meeting/hearing, individuals are requested to refrain from wearing s cented products.
.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL TAKE UP NO NEW BUSINESS AFTER 11:00 P .M. AT REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETINGS. THIS SHALL BE INTERP RETED TO MEAN THAT NO
AGENDA ITEM OR OTHER BUSINESS WILL BE DISCUSSED OR ACTED UPON AFTER THE AGENDA ITEM UNDER CONSIDERATION AT 11:00 P.M. THE COMMISSION MAY SUSPEND
THIS RULE TO DISCUSS AND/OR ACT UPON ANY ADDITIONAL AGENDA ITEM(S) DEEMED APPROPRIATE BY A UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THE MEMBERS PRESENT.APPEAL RIGHTS: ANY
PERSON MAY FILE AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S ACTION ON AGENDA ITEMS WITHIN FIVE BUSINESS DAYS (NORMALLY 5:00 P.M. ON THE FOLLOWING TUESDAY)
AND WITHIN 10 CALENDAR DAYS OF AN ACTION ON A SUBDIVISION. AN APPEAL LETTER SHALL BE FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK, ALONG WITH A N APPEAL FEE OF $350 (FOR NON-
APPLICANTS) OR A $4,476 DEPOSIT (FOR APPLICANTS) MADE PAYABLE TO THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, AND SHALL SET FORTH THE BASIS FOR APPEAL. THERE IS A $50 .00
ADDITIONAL CHARGE FOR REQUEST FOR CONTINUATION OF AN APPEAL BY APPELLANT.
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
RECORDING OF MEMBERS PRESENT AND ABSENT
APPROVAL OR REVISION OF ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION OF MEETING PROCEDURES
URGENT COMMUNICATION
Anyone with an urgent communication on a topic not on the agenda may address the Commission at this time. Please notify the
Community Development Director in advance.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Minutes, August 13, 2019
PUBLIC HEARING
2. 949 Del Presidio Blvd. (Chevron Gas Station) – Requests an Environmental and Design Review
Permit, Use Permit, Sign Program, and Major Sign Exception for the reconstruction of the service
station and convenience store. The project includes a new 2,964 square -foot minimart, fuel canopy
with partial illumination, site signage including a digital price ID sign, 4 fuel pumps, 18 parking
spaces (including 8 fueling spaces), and revised landscaping; APN: 175 -322-02; General
Commercial (GC) District; Chevron USA INC., owner; Gary Semling of Stantec Architect ure,
applicant; File Nos.: ED18-105, UP18-044, SP19-002 and SE19-001. Project Planner: Alan
Montes
3. 703 – 723 Third St. and 898 Lincoln Avenue – Request for an Environmental and Design Review
Permit, Use Permit and Lot Line Consolidation for the redevelopment of two contiguous Downtown
parcels, currently developed with 15,000 sq. ft. of commercial space with a new, 6 -story, 73 ft tall,
multifamily residential building with 120 rental units above 121 garage parking lift spaces and 969
sq. ft of commercial retail space. The project includes requests for height and density bonuses,
and a front setback waiver; APNS: 011 -278-01 & -02; Second/Third Mixed Use East (2/3 MUE)
District Zones; Wick Polite of Seagate Properties, Inc., Applicant; 703 Third Stre et LP, Owners;
Case No’s: ED18-018; UP18-008, LLA18-001. Project Planner: Steve Stafford
DIRECTOR’S REPORT
COMMISSION COMMUNICATION
ADJOURNMENT
I. Next Meeting: September 10, 2019
II. II. I, Anne Derrick, hereby certify that on Friday, August 23, 2019, I posted a notice of the August 27, 2019 Planning
Commission meeting on the City of San Rafael Agenda Board.
In the Council Chambers of the City of San Rafael, August 13, 2019
Regular Meeting
San Rafael Planning Commission Minutes
For a complete video of this meeting, go to http://www.cityofsanrafael.org/meetings
CALL TO ORDER
Present: Jeff Schoppert
Berenice Davidson
Aldo Mercado
Sarah Loughran
Absent: Barrett Schaefer
Mark Lubamersky
Shingai Samudzi
Also Present: Alicia Giudice, Senior Planner
Raffi Boloyan, Planning Manager
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
RECORDING OF MEMBERS PRESENT AND ABSENT
APPROVAL OR REVISION OF ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION OF MEETING PROCEDURES
URGENT COMMUNICATION
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Minutes, July 23, 2019
Jeff Schoppert moved and Berenice Davidson seconded to approve Minutes as presented. The vote is
as follows:
AYES: Jeff Schoppert, Berenice Davidson, Aldo Mercado, Sarah Loughran
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Barrett Schaefer, Mark Lubamersky, Shingai Samudzi
PUBLIC HEARING
2. 5800 Northgate Drive (Northgate Mall) –Temporary Use Permit (UP19-027) for a base
camp/staging operation area for the movie production for “13 Reasons Why” in a portion
of the Northgate Mall Shopping Center parking lot along Las Gallinas Ave; APN: 175-060-
67; General Commercial (GC) Zoning District; XGP XI Northgate LLC, owner; Dan Kemp
(for Paramount Television), applicant. File No.: UP19-027. Project Planner: Raffi Boloyan
Staff Report
Berenice Davidson moved and Aldo Mercado seconded to adopt resolution approving project as
presented. The vote is as follows:
AYES: Jeff Schoppert, Berenice Davidson, Aldo Mercado, Sarah Loughran
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Barrett Schaefer, Mark Lubamersky, Shingai Samudzi
3. Senate Bill (SB 35) Objective Planning Standards – Informational Presentation on Review
of draft “objective” planning design standards and for a ministerial (“by-right”) process
required by Senate Bill (SB 35). APN: Citywide, File No: P18-009. Project Planner: Raffi
Boloyan
Staff Report
This was an informational presentation. The Planning Commission provided individual comments. No
action was required.
DIRECTOR’S REPORT
COMMISSION COMMUNICATION
ADJOURNMENT
___________________________________
ANNE DERRICK, Administrative Assistant III
APPROVED THIS _____DAY OF_______, 2019
_____________________________________
Sarah Loughran, Chair
Community Development Department – Planning Division
Meeting Date: August 27, 2019
Agenda Item:
Case
Numbers:
UP18-008/ED18-018/LLA18-0011
Project
Planner:
Steve Stafford/ 415-458-5048
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBJECT: 703 – 723 Third St. and 898 Lincoln Avenue – Request for Use Permit, Environmental
and Design Review Permit and Lot Line Consolidation for the redevelopment of two contiguous
Downtown parcels, currently developed with 15,000 sq. ft. of commercial space with a new, 6-story, 73
ft tall, mixed-use building with 120 residential ‘rental’ units above 121 garage parking spaces/
mechanical lifts and 969 sq. ft of ground-floor commercial space. The project includes requests for
height and density bonuses, and a front setback waiver; APNS: 011-278-01 & -02; Second/Third Mixed
Use East (2/3 MUE) District Zones; Wick Polite of Seagate Properties, Inc., Applicant; 703 Third Street
LP, Owners; Downtown Neighborhood.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A proposal to redevelop 27,000 sq. ft. Downtown site with a new, 6-story, 73 ft tall, mixed-use building with
120 residential ‘rental’ units above 121 garage parking spaces/mechanical lifts and 969 sq. ft. ground-floor
commercial space has been in the planning process since 2017. The project had initially proposed a 6
story, 66 ft tall building with 138 new residential units above 152 garage parking spaces when first
submitted for conceptual review in 2018, then was subsequently reduced of 120 units and 121 garage
parking space/mechanical lifts but increased in height from 66 ft to 73 ft (still within 6 stories) to address
prior design-related comments and technical code requirements.
As currently designed, the project requests major concessions/waivers to certain development standards
including a 19 ft height bonus, a 59-unit density bonus above the state mandated 35% bonus, and a waiver
of the 5 ft front setback requirements. Under the State Density Bonus law, projects that provide certain
affordability levels are eligible for up to 3 concession/waivers and up to a 35% density bonus. This project
seeks greater density and height (and a reduction of the required front setback) than outlined in the City’s
density bonus regulations, therefore, these are considered ‘major’ concessions¹ under the City’s Density
Bonus law and require the submittal of a financial pro forma by the applicant to demonstrate the necessity
of the requested modifications. Due to the required financial pro forma, the project will require final action
by the City Council (Council), following the review and recommendations of the Design Review Board
(Board) and the Planning Commission.
During the February 26, 2019 Planning Commission study session to provide preliminary feedback to staff
on various policy areas, including the requested density bonus, height bonus and front setback waiver, the
mechanical parking lifts and the draft environmental (CEQA) findings, the Planning Commission indicated
their support for the current project, including staff’s determination that the project is exempt from CEQA
(Section 15332; In-Fill Development Projects), subject to the project providing greater affordability. In
response, the formal project submittal now includes a total of 12 affordable or below-market-rate (BMR)
housing units; in addition to the nine (9) required BMR units (5 units at the very low-income level and 4
units at the low-income level), the applicant proposes to add three (3) additional BMR units in the moderate-
income level for a 10-year term.
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case Nos: UP18-008/ED18-018/LLA18-001
703-723 Third St/898 Lincoln Ave
August 27, 2019
Page 2
On May 7, 2019, the Board reviewed the formal project submittal for site and building design and
unanimously recommended approval with enhanced “Gateway Corner” (Third St. and Tamalpais Ave.)
façade treatments (unique materials and colors).
Overall, staff is supportive of the addition of housing in this part of Downtown and the project would provide
much needed housing near services and transit. Housing supply is a major issue, not only in San Rafael,
but throughout the region and state. Housing at this location is the most ideal location for housing in San
Rafael, given the proximity to transit, downtown services, and other modes of transportation. The project
presents an opportunity to be a catalyst for bringing additional mixed-use housing projects downtown and
near transit. Staff supports the proposed 6-story scale of the project, primarily based on the scale of the
neighboring BioMarin campus which is 48-67’ in height and includes a height bonus. In accordance with
the Planning Commission’s request, the project has voluntarily increased its affordability as much as the
applicant states the financial pro forma will allow before the project becomes financial infeasible to
construct. Furthermore, given the current economic conditions with costs of land, construction costs, the
applicant has demonstrated through a financial pro forma that the number of units are necessary to make
the project financially feasible, a standard established by the State. Although the City has not yet seen
mechanical parking lifts in any projects, these are trending in development projects in other Bay Area
communities and provide more efficient use of land.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the Draft Resolution recommending to the City
Council, approval of a Use Permit, an Environmental and Design Review Permit, and a Lot Line
Consolidation for the project (Exhibit 2).
PROPERTY FACTS
Address/Location: 703 - 723 Third St./ 898 Lincoln Ave. Parcel Number(s): 011-278-01 & -02
Property Size: 27,367 sf (combined) Neighborhood: Downtown
Site Characteristics
General Plan Designation Zoning Designation Existing Land-Use
Project Site: Second/Third St. Mixed-Use
(2/3 MU)
Second/Third St. Mixed-Use
East (2/3 MUE)
Commercial retail; office
North: Hetherton Office (HO) HO Private parking lot; retail
South: Lindaro Office (LO) Planned Development (1901) BioMarin parking structure
East: Public/Quasi-Public (P/QP) P/QP Bettini Transit Center
West: 2/3 MU 2/3 MUE Goodwill
BACKGROUND
Site Description/Setting:
The project site is comprised of two (2) contiguous developed Downtown parcels with a combined 27,367
sq. ft. lot size. The project site has three frontages: Third St., Lincoln Ave and Tamalpais Ave. It is flat (<1%
average cross-slope) and located outside the Downtown parking district. The entire site is located within
the 100-year flood plain and must comply with FEMA requirements for finished grade. The site is currently
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case Nos: UP18-008/ED18-018/LLA18-001
703-723 Third St/898 Lincoln Ave
August 27, 2019
Page 3
developed with approximately 15,000 sq. ft. of combined commercial space within two, 1-2-story buildings
and a surface parking lot.
Access to the project site is currently along all three frontages, Third St., Lincoln Ave and Tamalpais Ave.
The west portion of the project site (898 Lincoln Ave.) was originally developed in the 1940s and has a
long history of automotive sales and service uses. It is identified in the current General Plan as a ‘housing
opportunity’ site. The east portion of the project site (703 Third St.) is relatively newer and was developed
in 1995 and until recently long-served the community as “Marin Filmworks”. The east portion of the site is
immediately west of the City’s Bettini Transit Center and southwest of the new Downtown SMART station.
The BioMarin campus lies south and southwest of the project site.
Project History:
On March 2, 2017, the project obtained Pre-application review comments from staff. At the time of Pre-
application review, the scope of the project was larger than the current proposal and included 138 units
above 152 garage parking spaces in a new 7-story (74.5 ft tall) residential building.
Following the Pre-Application, the project was slightly revised and reduced in scope. The numbers of units
remained at 138. The parking was provided on one level of the building, and included a total of 143 parking
spaces, with 135 spaces provided in the form of a mechanical jig saw parking lift system. The design
included projections of the upper floors over the public right-of-way (sidewalk), along all three frontages.
As required by City code, the Conceptual Design Review application was reviewed by the Design Review
Board (Board) on June 20, 2017 (Commission Liaison Schaefer). The general theme of the Board’s
comments included the need for a higher-quality ‘Gateway’ design with limited sidewalk encroachments,
stepped back upper-stories and ground-floor commercial space, particularly along the Tamalpais Avenue,
which are discussed below in greater detail below, in the Design Review Board section of this report.
At staff’s request, the applicant agreed to also present the Conceptual Review application to the Planning
Commission. Although not required by the code, both staff and the applicant found that this early feedback
by the Commission would be helpful.; given the large scale of the project at such key Downtown location.
On July 25, 2017, the Planning Commission reviewed the Conceptual Design Review application project
and provided the following comments, which were pretty much in line with the Board’s comments:
• Scale and building height are acceptable, but look to reduce massing with stepbacks on the upper
two floors;
• Building design needs to be worthy of ‘Gateway’ location; architecture needs to create a ‘signature’
or ‘statement’;
• Site needs an ‘iconic’ high-quality design.
• Greater density OK with increased affordability though this may or may not amount to a proposed
density bonus.
• Commercial space required on ground-floor, particularly along the Tamalpais frontage and maybe
the Lincoln frontage.
• Parking lifts are acceptable, though operational concerns exist.
• Reduction in on-site parking may be supported due to proximity to transit if it improves
egress/ingress and circulation. Explore shared parking with BioMarin, establishment of on-site car-
share and/or bike-share facility.
• Setback waiver may be supported if improvements included in the design to improve the pedestrian
experience (i.e., relocate the required landscape setback from 3rd St to Tamalpais and/or additional
street landscaping, etc.).
• Greater vertical and horizontal articulation required on all elevations.
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case Nos: UP18-008/ED18-018/LLA18-001
703-723 Third St/898 Lincoln Ave
August 27, 2019
Page 4
• Minimize sidewalk projections to bay windows/balconies set in an irregular pattern.
• Minimize or eliminate driveways along the Tamalpais frontage.
Formal planning applications were submitted March 2018 with the following design revisions:
• Number of units decreased by 18 (from 138 to 120 units);
• The unit configuration remains similar, but the unit sizes have decreased an average of 10%
(approx.)
• Height has increased from 66 ft to 73 ft, but still maintain 6 floors;
• Ground-floor commercial space, bike ‘lounge’ storage and lobby areas are proposed along the
Tamalpias, Third St. and Lincoln Ave frontages;
• All previously proposed projections over the public right-of-have been eliminated;
• Upper story of the structure has been stepped back;
• Driveway access along the Tamalpais Ave. frontage has been reduced from 52’ to 20’
• On-site parking have decreased from 143 to 121 spaces;
• The rooftop common or shared outdoor space has increased;
• Rooftop photovoltaic solar energy system has increased;
• Site landscaping proposed on the ground-floor, podium- (2nd floor) level and roof has increased;
and
• Use of varied exterior façade materials, textures and treatments has increased.
On February 26, 2019, the Planning Commission held a study session to provide preliminary comments,
at the request of staff, on miscellaneous policy areas, including the requested density bonus, height bonus
and front setback waiver, the proposed use of mechanical parking lifts and the draft environmental (CEQA)
findings. The Planning Commission indicated their support for the current project, subject to the project
providing greater affordability, and staff’s determination that the project is exempt from CEQA (California
Environmental Quality Act), pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (In-Fill Development Projects),
while requesting the Board provide recommendations on the building and site design details.
At the request of the Planning Commission, the project has voluntarily increased the proposed affordability,
from nine (9) Below-Market-Rate (BMR) units (5 units at very low-income household levels and 4 units at
low-income household levels) to 12 BMR units (5 units at very low-income household levels and 4 units at
low-income household levels plus 3 BMR units at the moderate-income household levels.
On May 7, 2019, the Board reviewed the formal project for site and building design and unanimously (4-0-
2 vote; Planning Commission Liaison Davidson) recommended approval with enhanced “Gateway Corner”
(Third St. and Tamalpais Ave.) façade treatments (unique materials and colors).
Video from each meeting and the study session may be viewed at www.cityofsanrafael.org/meetings and
then clicking on archived “Design Review Board” or “Planning Commission” meetings, and selecting video
from the meeting or study session date.
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case Nos: UP18-008/ED18-018/LLA18-001
703-723 Third St/898 Lincoln Ave
August 27, 2019
Page 5
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Use:
The project proposes redevelopment of two contiguous parcels with a new, 6-story, 73 ft-tall, multifamily
residential building. The proposed structure would contain a ground floor with 121 parking spaces, common
area, lobby, utility areas and a 3,733 sq. ft retail space. Floors 2-6 would host 120 residential rental units.
On top of the 6th floor, a roof top deck is proposed with various amenities. The proposed 120 units would
be configured as follows:
33 Studio units 342 - 539 sq. ft
44 1-bedroom units 545 - 795 sq. ft.
43 2-bedroom units 899 - 1,068 sq. ft.
The average size of the 120 units is 679, sq. ft., ranging from 342 sq. ft. as the smallest unit and 1,068 sq.
ft. as the largest size unit. The project does not include a condominium map, therefore, the units would be
rental. All existing development on the two parcels are proposed to be demolished.
Affordability:
Nine (9) of the units are required to be affordable at the very-low income household level with five (5) units
affordable to very low-income households and four (4) units affordable to low-income households. The five
(5) very low-income units represent 11% affordability of the base project, while the four (4) low income
units represents 9% affordability. The provision of 11% of the base project as very low-income units
qualifies the project for up to a 35% density bonus and up to three (3) concessions.
In response to the Planning Commission study session, the project voluntarily proposes three (3) more of
the units to be affordable at the moderate-income household income level for a fixed period of 10 years.
With the three additional units, the project proposes a total of 12 units. (affordability of 5 Very Low, 4 Low
and 3 Moderate). This is referred as the Proposed Project scenario.
Density:
The project proposes to construct 120 rental units, which is 59 units above the maximum City density
allowed, plus the state mandated 35% density bonus. The maximum local density for the site is 1 unit/600
sq. ft of land area, which equals 45 units (45.6 units rounded down to 45). The project proposes to set
aside 20% (or 9 units) of the base 45 units as ‘affordable’. This amount of affordability makes the project
eligible for a density bonus of up to 35% and up to three (3) concessions. The 35% density bonus would
result in 16 bonus units, for a total of 61 units. The project requests a concession for the increased density
above the 35% bonus, as one of the concessions for which they are eligible.
Given that the site is a mixed-use zoning district, it is also eligible for up to a 1.5 FAR (in addition to the
residential density). As proposed, the project would only include a 969 sq. ft. commercial space on the
ground floor, which equals a 0.04 FAR.
Site Plan:
Vehicular egress and ingress to the project site would be along two, 20’-wide, two-way driveways on both
the Tamalpais and Lincoln Ave frontages. Pedestrian access to the project site would be primarily along
the Third St. frontage though secondary pedestrian access is provided along both the Lincoln and
Tamalpais Avenue frontages. The project proposes development to the property lines, including the front
property line (Third St.) which requires a minimum 5 ft. landscaped setback. The lack of building setback
is mitigated by the architectural design which incorporates a 5 ft wide handicap ramp setback and a 1 ft
landscape planter for a total of 6 ft setback along 122 linear ft of third St (62% of the frontage). The upper
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case Nos: UP18-008/ED18-018/LLA18-001
703-723 Third St/898 Lincoln Ave
August 27, 2019
Page 6
stories would be built within the property lines and portions of the upper four (4) floors would stepped back.
The project requests a waiver to the 5 ft front setback development, as one of their three eligible density
bonus concessions
Architecture:
The project proposes a contemporary design with large, deep-set windows, varied textures of exterior
materials and an expansive ‘earthtone/woodtone’ color palette which would provide a unifying visual form
along all of the building elevations. A 22’-tall brick veneer podium supports three (3) upper floors with
stucco exterior with horizontal dark brown cementitious wood boards creating accent areas. Dimensional
bronze metal coping separates the mid floors of the project and the upper two floors, which is punctuated
by more stepback, greater use of the horizontal cementitious wood boards and the introduction of vertical
gray corrugated siding at each of the four corners of the proposed new building. Large recessed storefront
windows are proposed along the ground floor of all three frontages. Recessed balconies are proposed
along all of the upper floors of all three frontages.
An O-shaped landscaped courtyard is proposed on the podium/2nd floor level which opens to the sky. The
amenities proposed for the courtyard create a more centralized reflective seating area. The amenities
proposed for the rooftop create groups of more intimate seating areas with amenities including
cooking/grilling/dining areas, firepits, and skills games (foosball, darts and cornhole) An expansive
photovoltaic solar panel energy system is proposed to share the remainder of the roof. The project
proposes a tall (22’) ground floor, to allow the installation and operation of mechanical parking lifts. A
Material and Color Board has been prepared by the applicant and will be presented during the Planning
Commission hearing.
Building Height:
The project proposes a building height of 73 ft to the roof deck, composed of 6 stories. The height limit for
the site is 66 ft (54 ft base height plus a 12 ft height bonus identified by the General Plan), for residential
projects that provide required affordability. The project proposes an additional 7 ft above the allowed 12 ft
height bonus (for a total of 19 ft bonus), and this extra height is being requested as a concession, as one
of their concessions under the State Density Bonus law.
Parking:
The project proposes to provide 121 parking spaces on site. All parking would be on the ground floor and
that this level would have a taller plate height (22 ft tall) to accommodate the mechanical lifts. The project
proposes to provide 109 of the 121 parking spaces through mechanical ‘jig-saw’ lifts and the remaining 12
spaces would be non-mechanical lift spaces for electric vehicle (EV), visitor, ADA and car share
Through State Density bonus law, projects that are within ½ mile of a transit facility are required to provide
0.5 parking space/bedroom. In this case, the project includes 163 bedrooms, therefore 81.5 (82) parking
spaces would be required to meet the parking required for the residential portion of the project. Since the
project site is located outside the Downtown Parking District, the project is also required to provide 3-4
(969 sq. ft. of ground level commercial space at 1 space per 250-300 gross building sq. ft., generally)
parking spaces to meet the parking required for the nonresidential portion of the project. The project
proposes to provide 121 parking space, which is 35-36 spaces in excess of the required parking. The
reduced parking requirement does not count as a concession or waiver, under State Density Bonus law.
Landscaping:
The project proposes 12,555 sq. ft. (46%) of site landscaping, where a minimum 10% (2,737 sq. ft.) is
required. New street trees are proposed along all three building frontages on the ground-floor. A combined
4,528 sq. ft. of landscaped area is proposed on the podium (2nd floor)-level between a central courtyard
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case Nos: UP18-008/ED18-018/LLA18-001
703-723 Third St/898 Lincoln Ave
August 27, 2019
Page 7
and common outdoor deck areas along the front (Third St. elevation) and rear (adjacent to the paint store
located at 770 Second St.) building elevations. A landscaped rooftop amenities area, 5,317 sq. ft. in size,
is also proposed. In addition, the project proposes raised Corten steel planters along the ground-floor of
the Third St. frontage. Details on specific landscaping species are not provided at this time.
ANALYSIS
San Rafael General Plan 2020 Consistency:
There are numerous General Plan policies applicable to this project. The General Plan contains many
competing policies that need to be weighed and considered. Consistency with a General Plan is
determined by reviewing and weighing the goals and polices of all elements of the San Rafael General
Plan 2020. Overall, the project would be consistent with most of the applicable San Rafael General Plan
2020 policies.
The General Plan land use designation of 2/3MU allows office use, office support and service uses and
residential uses as part of mixed-use development. After conceptual review, the project proposed ground-
floor commercial space and would therefore be consistent with Land Use Policy LU-23 (Land Use Map
and Categories). Although the building height and density exceed the standards established by the
General Land Use Element Policies LU-8 (Density of Residential Development) and LU-12 (Building
Heights)/LU-13 (Height Bonuses), staff finds that there are adequate justifications to support these
deviations, including: 1) requesting concessions/waiver under the State Density Bonus law allows the City
to consider the deviations through a financial pro forma as it demonstrates that the number of units
proposed and the height are needed to make the housing project economically viable; 2) the project does
not utilize the 1.5 FAR allowed for non-residential intensity on the site, but instead provides additional
residential density; 3) the FEMA flood zone requirements to raise the building site and plate height needed
to support stacked parking cause the need to increase the height about the height limit; and 4) Downtown
Station Area plan recommendation to allow higher density in these locations.
The project site is the most appropriate housing site in San Rafael due to its direct proximity to SMART
station, Bettini, Transit Center, U.S. Hwy. 101, and Downtown as a whole. As such, the western half of the
project site (898 Lincoln Ave) is listed as an underutilized mixed-use site in Appendix B of the General
Plan, as a Housing Opportunity site per H-14 (Adequate Sites) which requires the City to maintain
sufficient supply of land for multi-family housing. Housing Policy H-15 (Infill Near Transit) further
encourages higher densities adjacent to a transit hub, focusing on the priority development are around the
Downtown SMART station. The project also would be in accordance with Housing Policy H-18
(Inclusionary Housing Requirements) by providing 20% affordable housing units or 9 units.
The project design likely would be in accordance with Community Design Policy CD-5 (Views), which
seeks to respect and enhance to the greatest extent possible, views of St. Raphael’s church bell tower,
hills and ridgelines from public streets, parks and publicly accessible pathways.
The project site is located within the “Hetherton Gateway” District of Downtown. In compliance with
Neighborhoods policy NH-37 (Hetherton Office District Design Considerations), design considerations
for this area call for “…high-quality and varied design with landmark features that enhance the District’s
gateway image”. New building design should:
• Emphasize gateway character by incorporating transitional treatments such as accent elements
and public art;
• Stepback upper stories;
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case Nos: UP18-008/ED18-018/LLA18-001
703-723 Third St/898 Lincoln Ave
August 27, 2019
Page 8
• Ground-floors include a pedestrian scale; and
• Include useable outdoor areas, courtyards and arcades that are landscaped, in sunny locations
and protected from freeway noise.
Staff finds the current building design complies with the design considerations of the “Hetherton Gateway”
District, as adopted in the General Plan; in that; 1) the large storefront windows, Corten steel raised
landscape planters and the brick veneer podium all contribute to the pedestrian scale of the ground-floor;
2) the upper stories have been setback along with staggered (patios), the partial Third St setback and
landscape planter enhances the pedestrian scale of the sidewalk experience, 4) The Third St and
Tamalpias corner retail provides outdoor seating and exposures; 5) public access to the proposed bicycle
valet and storage provides for enhance pedestrian interaction. 6) the rooftop amenity package provides
open air recreational areas protected from the noise of Highway 101, and 7) the podium courtyard and
rooftop provide landscaped common or shared outdoor areas which are open to the sky and protected
from surrounding ambient noise levels.
The project would generate 33 net new AM peak hour trips (7- 9am weekdays) and 26 PM net new peak
hour trips (4-6pm weekdays). This number of new trips was modeled and found to comply with the Level
of Service (LOS) standards prescribed in Circulation Element Policy C-5. The proposed development
would occur when adequate infrastructure, including circulation and utilities, are available (Land Use
Policy LU-2).
A complete analysis of the pertinent policies and programs is presented in the attached General Plan
Consistency Table (Exhibit 3).
Zoning Ordinance Consistency:
The project has been reviewed for consistency with the San Rafael Zoning Ordinance. A complete analysis
of the pertinent regulations (standards and criteria) is presented in the attached Zoning Ordinance
Consistency Table (Exhibit 4). Overall, the project would be consistent with all applicable regulations of
the Zoning Ordinance, with the exception of height, density and front setback, and the applicant has
requested concessions to these standards under the State Density Bonus law
Chapter 5 – Commercial and Office Districts
The project site is located within the Second/Third St. Mixed Use East (2/3 MUE) District, a Downtown
Zoning district. The proposed project will require consistency with the property development standards for
the 2/3 MUE District, including maximum density (600 sq. ft. of lot area/unit), minimum setbacks (5’ front),
building height limit of 66 ft. (54 ft. + 12 ft. height bonus) and minimum landscaping (10% including required
front setback).
As designed, the project would conditionally comply with the maximum density and height standards for
the 2/3 MUE District with a 19 ft. height bonus with the approval of a concession under the State Density
Bonus law for a height bonus and a density bonus above the 35% allowed. (see discussion below).
The project also would conditionally comply with the minimum setback requirement with a setback waiver
as another concession under the State Density Bonus law for meeting the City’s affordable housing
requirement (20% or 9 units). The project would comply with the 10% minimum landscape requirement
through the inclusion of site landscaping. 2nd floor courtyard, rooftop decks, by providing 46% landscaping.
Private and common outdoor area is encouraged rather than required in the Downtown districts. The
project includes balconies for many of the units and a common courtyard and roof top deck to provide this
requirement.
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case Nos: UP18-008/ED18-018/LLA18-001
703-723 Third St/898 Lincoln Ave
August 27, 2019
Page 9
As stated earlier in staff’s report, residential uses in the 2/3 MUE District are allowed only as part of mixed-
use projects. After conceptual review, the project was revised and continues to include a reasonable size
commercial space (969 sq. ft.) on the ground floor. Providing more commercial space on this site is
challenging due to the parking and mechanical/utility/refuse infrastructure that are also provided on the
ground floor.
Chapter 16 – Site and Use Regulations
Affordable Housing Requirement
Pursuant to Section 14.16.030 (Affordable Housing Requirements) of the Zoning Ordinance, projects
proposing 21 or more housing units are required to provide 20% of the proposed units as ‘affordable’
housing units. The base density for this site is 45 units (27,3167 sq. ft. lot/600 sq. ft. density standard). The
project proposes to set aside 20% (9 units) of those 45 units as affordable. The City’s inclusionary housing
ordinance requires that for rental projects, 50% of the inclusionary units (5 units) be eligible to very low-
income households (<50% county median income) and the remaining 50% of the affordable units (4 units)
be eligible for low-income households (50%-80% of county median income).
The provision of five (5) units as affordable to very low-income households represents an affordability of
11% of the base project in that income category. Under the State Density Bonus law, 11% of total base
units affordable in the very low-income category entitles the project to a 35% density bonus (15.75 bonus
units, rounded up to 16 bonus units). The 35% density bonus would result in a total of 61 units.
This affordability level would also allow the project to seek up to three (3) concessions (concessions
requested by the project are: 1) 19’ height bonus, where 12 ft is identified; 2) density bonus above the 35%
to allow 59 additional units, above the 16 allowed by state density bonus law; and 3) a front setback waiver
under the State Density Bonus law.
All three of the proposed concessions requested by the applicant, are considered major concessions
(SRMC 14.16.030.H.3.b.v) and therefore are subject to approval of the City Council and require that the
applicant demonstrate through a financial pro forma that the concessions are needed to make the project
financially feasible.
As part of the formal submittal, a financial pro forma was submitted by the developer and has been peer
reviewed by a 3rd party economist hired by the city to confirm its conclusions:
Density Bonus (Automatic)
By providing 5 of the 9 ‘affordable’ units as very low income, project is eligible for an automatic 35%
density bonus or a total of 16 additional ‘density bonus’ units above the 45 base units, for a total of
61 units.
Additional Density Bonus (Discretionary)
The project proposes a total density of 120 units, 75 units above the maximum allowable density
on the site and 59 units above the ‘automatic’ 35% state density bonus provided by complying with
the City’s affordable housing requirement. The State Density Bonus law allows a City to establish
a procedure to consider a bonus above 35% if it chooses.
At the request of the Planning Commission during the study session to off-set the proposed
additional density, the project has now voluntarily increased the proposed affordability, from nine
(9) Below-Market-Rate (BMR) units (5 units at very low-income household levels and 4 units at low-
income household levels) to 12 BMR units (5 units at very low-income household levels and 4 units
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case Nos: UP18-008/ED18-018/LLA18-001
703-723 Third St/898 Lincoln Ave
August 27, 2019
Page 10
at low-income household levels plus 3 units at the moderate-income household levels). Unlike the
required affordability, which would have no limiting period, the voluntary increase in affordability is
proposed to have a 10-year term. The applicant states the affordability has been increased as much
as the financial pro forma will allow before the project becomes financially infeasible pursue and
acquire funding.
The applicant has provided a to a financial pro forma demonstrating that the additional density
bonus results in “identifiable, financially sufficient and actual cost reductions” (underline added) to
the project. This concession requesting a density bonus above the maximum allowed under the
State Density Bonus law is discretionary, allows staff to hire a consulting economist for peer review
(at the applicant’s cost) and requires City Council review and approval. The results of the peer
review of the financial pro forma are found below in the discussion section.
Height Bonus Concession (Discretionary)
The project requests a 19 ft. height bonus, from the maximum allowable building height of 54 ft to
73 ft. In the 2/3 MUE District, both the General Plan and Section 14.16.190 allow a height bonus
up to 12 ft (from 54 ft to 66 ft) for complying with the City’s affordable housing requirement as an
automatic concession, which is granted if the project provides 20% affordability.
The project requests a 19 ft bonus, which exceeds the 12 ft automatic concession by 7 feet,
therefore the applicant has requested a major concession to the height standard. Under the City’s
Zoning Ordinance (SRMC 14.16.030.H.3.b.v),, concessions not identified 14.16.030.H.3.a. are
considered a major concession and require submittal of a financial pro forma. If approved, the
concession counts concession under the State Density Bonus law.
Setback Waiver Concession (Discretionary)
The project also requests a waiver of the required 5’ landscaped front setback for portions of the
Third St frontage as a concession under the State Density Bonus law for meeting their required
20% affordable housing requirement. This concession requesting a waiver of the required 5’
landscaped front setback, like the additional 59-unit density bonus above the maximum allowed
under the State Density Bonus law, is discretionary, allows staff to hire a consulting economist for
peer review (at the applicant’s cost) and requires City Council review and approval.
At the time of formal project submittal, the applicant provided a financial pro forma demonstrating
that the waiver of the required 5’ landscaped front setback results in “identifiable, financially
sufficient and actual cost reductions” (underline added) to the project. In addition, the proposed 0
ft front setback for portions of the building front is compatible with the surrounding built environment
as discussed below.
Staff supports the requested setback waiver concession.
Building Height Exclusion
Pursuant to Section 14.16.120 (Exclusions to Maximum Height Requirements) of the Zoning
Ordinance, architectural and screening features, and utilities which extend above the maximum
allowable building height, may be excluded from height calculations with an Environmental and
Design Review Permit. The project proposes a steel shade trellis over the outdoor seating areas
and elevator and staircase over runs on portions of the roof deck area which increases the overall
height on portions of the project approximately 10’, from 73 ft to 83’, where a maximum 54’ building
height is allowed (66’ with height bonus). Similar to the 4’ parapet which surrounds the roof, the
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case Nos: UP18-008/ED18-018/LLA18-001
703-723 Third St/898 Lincoln Ave
August 27, 2019
Page 11
rooftop trellis and elevator/staircase over runs are architectural features and are excluded from
building height calculations, based on the following:
• It is an integral shade structure for the common roof deck amenities for the residents; and
• It is an architectural or design feature which screens the elevator and staircase shafts for
the residential units.
Chapter 18 – Parking Standards
The typical parking requirements contained in the Zoning Ordinance (SRMC 14.18.040) does not apply to
this project, given that it qualifies for reduced parking through the State Density Bonus law. Through this
law, projects that are within ½ mile of a transit facility are required to provide 0.5 parking space/bedroom.
In this case, the project includes 163 bedrooms, therefore 81.5 (82) parking spaces are required to meet
the residential parking requirement. Since the project site is located outside the Downtown Parking District,
the project is required to provide 3-4 parking spaces to meet the nonresidential parking required. The
project proposes to provide 121 parking space, which is 35-36 spaces in excess of the required parking.
The reduced parking requirement does not count as a concession or waiver, under State Density Bonus
law and is inclusive of required ADA and guest spaces. Given that the required parking is established
under a state law, this reduced number of parking spaces also does not require a Parking Modification.
The project also proposes to use mechanical parking lifts to primarily meet the required parking for the
project; 109 of the 121 parking spaces are proposed to be provided by mechanical parking lifts, though not
the 12 ADA-accessible parking spaces, loading, ride share/care share or electric vehicle charging spaces.
The project proposes to use a three-level, semi-automatic, mechanical parking lift system (CityLift Model
3LP) with horizontal and vertical shifting platforms. The parking space dimensions of this mechanical
parking lift are:
• 17’ ¾” length;
• 6’ 6 ¾” – 6’ 10” width;
• 6’ 5” – 7’ height;
• 5,200 – 6,000 lbs. load per vehicle; and
• 33 seconds average retrieval time.
The CityLift Model 3LP operates without a pit. The driver remotely engages the system, similar to a garage
door opener, where the parking ‘platforms’ will automatically shift to an empty space. Parked vehicles are
automatically retrieved by entering the parking space number into the adjacent keypad. Access may be
secured by adding metal gates which open automatically only after the shifting process is completed. The
Board may learn more on the CityLift Model 3LP through the following link:
https://cityliftparking.com/solutions/puzzle-mechanical-parking, which includes a video of how they operate
CityLift mechanical parking “Puzzle” stackers are currently operating in Berkeley, Emeryville, Oakland, San
Francisco and Healdsburg. The Avalon Public Market in Emeryville (6701 Shellmound St.) is most similar
in scale of mechanical parking stacker system as proposed by the project. The Avalon Public Market is a
7-story, mixed-use building with 211 units above a 155 space, 3-level “puzzle” stacker system without a
pit and adjacent to public transit. Staff will coordinate a future opportunity to visit the Avalon Public Market
or another location with a CityLift Model 3 mechanical parking “Puzzle” stacker system.
These proposed mechanical parking stackers are a departure from the parking facility design envisioned
by the Parking Standards of the Zoning Ordinance, which is providing parking on a more established
horizontal or side-by-side configuration. A Parking Modification will be required, through a Use Permit, with
the recommendation of the Public Works Director and the Board, to allow mechanical parking lifts. The
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case Nos: UP18-008/ED18-018/LLA18-001
703-723 Third St/898 Lincoln Ave
August 27, 2019
Page 12
dimensions of the parking spaces provided by the mechanical parking appear to meet the City’s minimum
standards for Downtown (8.5’ x 18’) ‘standard’ parking spaces.
The proposed parking also complies with all other applicable parking standards. Under the Zoning
Ordinance, residential projects are not required to provide clean air vehicle parking or EV (electric vehicle)
charging stations. The project proposes 1 tandem loading space, 4 EV ready spaces, 1 tandem ride share
drop off space, and 1 car share space, and 2 visitor spaces. The project also proposes 32 bike storage
spaces, although only 4 short-term spaces and no long-term spaces are required for the project.
Chapter 22 – Use Permits
As discussed previously, the project will require Use Permit approval to allow: 1) Residential uses in a
commercial (2/3 MUE) zoning district; and 2) Parking Modification to allow use of mechanical parking lifts
to primarily meet the parking requirement for the project.
Residential uses area encouraged in the Downtown and in mixed-use development/redevelopment project
to help meet the City’s housing needs and “alive-after-five” vision. Automated parking or other mechanical
parking devices is one of the strategies identified in the Downtown Parking/Wayfinding Study as an
innovative parking solution to maximize valuable parking space areas. Therefore, staff recommends that
granting a Use Permit for both these features is appropriate.
Chapter 25 – Environmental and Design Review Permits
This project typically would require Environmental and Design Review Permit approval by the Commission,
given that; it proposes to construct a new multifamily residential structure. However, the City Council will
have final decision on the project, following the recommendations of both the Board and the Commission,
due to the major concessions requested (additional 59-unit density bonus above the state mandated 35%
bonus, 19 ft height bonus, and waiver of required 5’ landscaped front setback) under the State Density
Bonus law. The pertinent review criteria for Environmental and Design Review Permits, pursuant to Section
14.25.050 (Review Criteria; Environmental and Design Review Permits), are attached as part of the Zoning
Ordinance consistency table (Exhibit 4)
The review criteria for Environmental and Design Review Permits require that the proposed design
(architecture, form, scale, materials and color, etc.) of all new development ‘relate’ to the predominant
design or ‘character-defining’ design elements existing in the vicinity.
The scale and quality of the existing development located south of the core Downtown (Fourth St.) and
near U.S Highway 101 is changing, primarily due to the ongoing development of the BioMarin campus.
Low profile (1- and 2-story) development is being replaced with much taller (5- and 6-story) buildings. Staff
supports the 6-story scale proposed by the project. Determining the predominant design character is a
little more difficult. Structures within the adjacent BioMarin campus are integrated with a cohesive
architectural design with coordinated façade treatments. The project proposes a similar contemporary
design though with unique façade treatments (brick with Corten steel planters at the podium level and a
mixture of stucco and vertical and horizontal fiber cement board siding at the upper levels), greater
articulation, stepping back the upper stories and a more ‘residential’ window proportion.
The project design has been revised to include equal, high-quality design attention to all four building
elevations. In addition, the formerly proposed building encroachments over the sidewalk have been pulled
back and no parts of the upper stories project over the public right-of- way (ROW).
One of the reoccurring comments provided by both the Board and Planning Commission during Conceptual
Design Review is the project needs to exemplify a building design worthy of its ‘Gateway’ location;
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case Nos: UP18-008/ED18-018/LLA18-001
703-723 Third St/898 Lincoln Ave
August 27, 2019
Page 13
particularly the northeast corner (Tamalpais Ave. and Third St.) of the building closest to the Downtown
SMART station needs to create an architectural ‘statement’. The project has been revised to include a
‘Gateway’ option (Sh. A0.2A) which proposes to accentuate the ‘Gateway’ corner by; 1) Extending the
brick façade treatment from the ground-level up levels 2-4 to create the appearance of a ‘tower’ ,
approx..50’-wide along both the Tamalpais Ave. and Third St. frontages; 2) Further highlighting the
uniqueness of the ‘Gateway’ corner and the appearance of a ‘tower’ design with Corten steel panels,
similar to the ground-level planter material, on levels 5-6; and 3) Expanding the steel rooftop trellis to ‘cap’
the ‘Gateway’ tower or corner. The Board reviewed and recommended this “Gateway” design option along
with the other revisions to the project, which are presented to the Planning Commission.
San Rafael Design Guidelines:
The San Rafael Design Guidelines have been developed as interim criteria that implement design-related
General Plan Policies. The site is located within the Second/Third Corridor and Environs.
Second/Third Corridor and Environs
Second and Third Streets are to be attractive, landscaped major transportation corridors. While increased
pedestrian safety and comfort is desired on Second and Third, greater pedestrian use of the cross streets
is encouraged. 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 along Second and Third Streets, varied landscape setbacks are
appropriate;
• Additional high-canopy, traffic-tolerant street trees are strongly encouraged;
• Where possible, residential buildings in this area should orient to the more pedestrian-friendly side
street; and
• Driveway cuts and widths should be minimized to prevent vehicular conflicts.
The project proposes to orient pedestrian activity through the lobby area both through the main entry on
Third St and at the northwest corner of Third St./Lincoln Ave. The pertinent Downtown Design Guidelines
recommends orienting this lobby entrance to one of the more pedestrian-friendly side streets, either
Tamalpais or Lincoln Avenues, where possible.
Downtown Station Area Plan:
The project site is identified as a “potential development opportunity site” within the Downtown Station Area
Plan (SAP). Maximum development is assumed; a five-story mixed-use building with retail uses on the
ground-floor facing Tamalpais Avenue (fronting the SMART station). No on-site parking is assumed for the
ground-floor retail uses, even though the site is located outside the Downtown Parking District. Auto access
and egress occurs on Lincoln and Tamalpais Avenues. The following are recommended land use policy
changes from the SAP that are applicable to the project site:
Short-Term
• Reduce minimum parking requirements to one (1) space for two-bedroom residential units and 1.5
spaces for 3-bedroom units.
• Allow tandem parking spaces.
Long-Term
• Allow one-half space per residential unit to be located off-site in a municipal parking facility.
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case Nos: UP18-008/ED18-018/LLA18-001
703-723 Third St/898 Lincoln Ave
August 27, 2019
Page 14
• Allow off-site parking for ground-floor retail uses.
• Allow unbundled parking, where parking spaces are leased separately from residential units.
• Allow bicycle parking in lieu of some portion of the required on-site parking.
• Adopt a Form-Based Code and eliminate maximum density and FAR (Floor Area Ratio) limits.
Together with requiring no more than one parking space per unit, a Form-Based Code may allow
up to 200 residential units within maximum allowable building height and setbacks required on the
site.
• Allow development ‘bonuses’ (like reduced parking), beyond concessions under the State Density
Bonus law, in exchange for community benefits. Examples of community benefits include amenities
to support the more transit-oriented surroundings such as wider sidewalks and landscaping, open
space or plazas, provisions for car-sharing, and additional affordable housing units above the
minimum 20% requirement.
• Allow shared parking between daytime retail uses and nighttime residential uses.
• Allow stacked parking or parking lifts, to meet required on-site parking.
• Explore reconstruction of Tamalpais Avenue to serve as a “Complete Street” to serve all travel
modes. In concept, Tamalpais Avenue may be converted to one-way northbound travel with a Class
II bicycle lane, pull-out staging areas and wider sidewalks.
The proposed project would be consistent with most of the applicable recommendations in the Station Area
Plan document. The project has been revised to include a small ground-floor commercial use at the
northeast corner of Third St/Tamalpais Ave. Some of the short-term and mid-term recommended changes
of the SAP were implemented by the City through recent zoning ordinance amendments. The project
proposes reduced parking (see discussion above), a wider sidewalk along the Tamalpais Ave. frontage
(existing sidewalks along the Lincoln Ave. and Third St. frontages were widened previously.) and increased
landscaping (street trees and raised planters) along all three frontages. The project proposes to meet a
bulk of its parking requirement with mechanical parking lifts, which create both stacked and tandem parking
configurations.
Good Design Principles:
On August 14, 2017, an Ad Hoc City Council Sub-Committee convened to discuss “Community Design,”
with a primary focus on Downtown development. The Ad Hoc Sub-Committee included Mayor Phillips,
Council Member Andrew McCullough, two members of the Design Review Board (former Board Member
Spielman and Stewart Summers) and two members of the Planning Commission (former Commissioners
Paul and Robertson). The initial purpose of the meeting was to determine if there are adequate tools and
resources to facilitate and achieve good design in development in San Rafael. The Sub-Committee was
provided with an inventory of our current resources (all referenced in this report), which are abundant and
comprehensive. The inventory of documents and regulations include the following:
✓ Downtown San Rafael Vision – 1993
✓ General Plan 2020 Policies & Programs for Downtown – 2004
✓ San Rafael Design Guidelines (Interim) – 2004
✓ Zoning Regulations for Downtown – 2004
✓ Downtown San Rafael Station Area Plan – 2012
Mayor Phillips assigned former Commissioner Paul the task of forming a working group to review these
resources and to develop a more concise and consolidated list of key criteria. The goal was to develop an
informational handout (“City of San Rafael Expectations for Good Design”) that can be provided to
developers/applicants. Former Commissioner Paul formed a small Working Group of local design
professionals and residents to review the above planning documents and regulations and consolidate them
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case Nos: UP18-008/ED18-018/LLA18-001
703-723 Third St/898 Lincoln Ave
August 27, 2019
Page 15
into more concise criteria. This working group presented their findings and a “Good Design Guidelines for
Downtown” slideshow to the Council at their February 5, 2018.
There are next steps, which include creating a checklist of these good design principles and adopting them;
however, staff is providing the applicable criteria from this presentation as Exhibit 5.
The project complies with many of these ‘good design’ criteria. Tamalpais Ave. is identified as a ‘gateway’
to the Downtown with excellent visibility from all transportation modes (pedestrian, bicycle and transit) and
the transit center. The project activates the Tamalpais Ave street front by providing a small (969 sq. ft.)
ground-level commercial retail space at the corner of Tamalpais Ave. and Third St. The project supports
Tamalpais Ave. as a ‘pedestrian street’ by minimizing driveway cuts to a single driveway with a 20’ width
and providing ample street tree pockets with grates. Larger and taller buildings, like the project, are
anticipated along the Second and Third St. corridors to create a ‘boulevard’ setting. A ‘base, middle and
top’ design strategy, similar to the project design, is encouraged though not required. The height and bulk
of the project is mitigated by stepbacks, articulation and use of varied exterior materials.
Subdivision Ordinance Consistency:
The project proposes construction of a new mixed-use building over the current property boundaries of
two adjacent legal Downtown parcels. The project is subject to the lot consolation provisions pursuant to
Chapter 15.05. of the Subdivision Ordinance. If the project is approved, a new the plat map, showing the
existing and proposed new lot lines, and a copy of the Grant Deed for the lot consolidation, shall be
submitted by the applicant and reviewed by the City Engineer and approved prior to recordation with the
County. This recordation must occur prior to building permit issuance.
The project is proposed as a rental project only. The applicant has not indicated their intent to make them
individual condominium units.
MAJOR TOPIC DISCUSSION
The following is a staff analysis/discussion on the main land use matters.
Land Use:
Residential uses are allowed and encouraged in this portion of the City as part of a mixed-use project.
While the project did not initially include any commercial use on the ground floor, the Planning Commission
encouraged it and the project has been revised to include 969 sq. ft. of ground-floor commercial space at
the southwest corner of Third St/Tamalpais Ave. Providing more commercial space on this site is
challenging due to the parking and mechanical/utility/refuse infrastructure space needs that are provided
on the ground floor; however, the project sponsor has indicated their intent to monitor future demand for
increased ground-floor commercial space within the project and a potential interest to convert or
reconfigure the ‘Lobby’ area into additional retail use.
Residential Density:
The project site contains a total lot area of 27,367 sq. ft (0.63 acres). Under the 2/3 MUE zoning, the project
site allows a maximum density of one unit per 600 sq. ft. of lot area, which translates to a maximum
allowable density of 45 units on the site. The State Density Bonus law allows an additional 35% (16 units)
for a total of 61 units. As noted above, the applicant has requested a 59-unit density bonus above the base
density and sate mandated 35% bonus, for a total of 120 units, which translates to a 97% density bonus.
The currently proposed 120 residential units, has been reduced since the original 138 units proposed
during Pre-Application and Conceptual Design Review. Determining the appropriate density for
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case Nos: UP18-008/ED18-018/LLA18-001
703-723 Third St/898 Lincoln Ave
August 27, 2019
Page 16
development of a site, typically, is a product of allowable parking (site and building design), traffic capacity,
height, design and environmental resources. In this case, the amount of density is further defined by the
State density bonus law and a concession requested by the applicant that demonstrates that the 120 units
are needed to make the project financially feasible.
There are two factors under which this density bonus is to be considered. First is the City’s local provision
to consider greater density bonuses than that allowed under State density bonus law. The State Density
Bonus provides for bonuses up to 35% for projects that meet certain affordability amounts. The City is not
required to grant a density bonus of more than 35%, but it may under State la w (GC section 65915(n)),
which states: “If permitted by local ordinance, nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit a city …
from granting a density bonus greater than what is described in this section.” The City in enacting the
density bonus law, included a local provision (SRMC 14.16.030.H.2), to allow density bonuses in excess
of 35% and states:
“the City in its sole discretion, to consider a density bonus exceeding the state minimum
requirements where the applicant agrees to construct a greater number of affordable housing
units than required pursuant to subsection 14.16.030.B.2 of this section and ne cessary to qualify
for the density bonus under this section. If such additional density bonus is granted by the City
and accepted by the applicant, the additional density bonus shall be considered an additional
concession or incentive”
This section was in tended to allow for density bonuses greater than 35% to be considered by the City
for projects that provide more affordability in a project tha n the 20% required by the State density bonus,
(i.e. a 100% affordable housing project requesting 100% bonus ). In this particular case, the applicant
has not proposed any more density than the minimum required to obtain a 35% density b onus.
The second factor is consideration of the concession/waiver and whether that concession is necessary
to make the project finan cially feasible, based on State density bonus law. If proven that the waiver is
necessary to make the project financially feasible, the city must grant the waiver.
The applicant has asked for additional density (59 units above the state mandated density bonus) as
one of their three eligible concessions/waivers , and through the provision of a financial pro forma, they
must show that the concession or incentive is necessary to achieve the offered affordability and make the
project financially feasible (Government Code, § 65915(k)(3).
At the February 26 study session, the applicant had proposed 120 unit, of which 9 were affordable (5 very
low and 4 low). At the request of the Planning Commission to explore more affordability to off-set the
proposed additional density bonus, the project has since voluntarily increased the proposed affordability,
from nine (9) Below-Market-Rate (BMR) units (5 units at very low-income household levels and 4 units at
low-income household levels) to 12 BMR units (5 units at very low-income household levels and 4 units at
low-income household levels plus 3 units at the moderate-income household levels for a fixed 10-year
term). Furthermore, the pro forma for the project was independently reviewed and confirmed that the 120
units is needed for this project to be financially feasible.
In accordance with the City’s ordinance, the City has hired an independent 3 rd party economist, Seifel
Consulting, to review the financial pro forma and assess whether the number of units requested ar e
necessary to make the project financially feasible. This includes evaluating all the costs associated with
the acquisition, construction and operation of the project. The applicant submitted a pro forma that
evaluated the base case (45 units, of which 9 are BMR)and the density bonus proposal (120 units, of
which 1 are BMR (5 very low, 4 low and 3 mods at 10 years)
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case Nos: UP18-008/ED18-018/LLA18-001
703-723 Third St/898 Lincoln Ave
August 27, 2019
Page 17
The pro forma evaluates the Base Case scenario (61 units, which includes the 35% density bonus) as
well as the Proposed Project scenario (120 units). The actual pro forma and specific numbers contained
in the pro forma are proprietary information and the City is not allowed to release those for public review.
However, the City’s consulting economist has reviewed all the information and prepared their analysis
that provides the conclusions of their review (Exhibit 6). In summary, the review finds:
• The Base Case scenario (61 units, which includes the 35% density bonus) is not financially feasible.
Based on the development costs, revenues and return metrics, the developer margin would be
negative, meaning the development costs would exceed the revenues, and thus make the project
not feasible to build. The review also concludes that with even with potential savings on
construction costs through value engineering, the Base Case scenario is not feasible and as the
return margin would still be negative.
• The Proposed Project scenario (120 units, including a 59-unit bonus above the state density bonus)
does yield a positive margin of return. However, that return is does not achieve a high enough
margin to be financially feasible according to typical return metrics. The review does conclude that
if construction costs are lowered by 15%, it would be within the range of development feasibility,
consistent with other projects in high demand locations. The additional density requested in the
Proposed Project scenario enhances financial feasibility by reducing development costs per
housing unit.
• Additionally, in response to the Commission’s suggestion during the study session to explore
additional affordability, a third scenario was evaluated by the City’s economist, which has been
called Alternative 1. This scenario evaluated a 120 -unit project, of which 18 units (20% of the 59-
unit additional density bonus) are BMR units (10 very low-income household levels and 8 low-
income household levels). The review concludes that, given the significant reduction in revenues
from doubling the number of affordable housing units, the Alternative 1 scenario is also not
financially feasible without a significant reduction in construction costs as the return margin would
be negative.
In addition to the density bonus request, there are other considerations when evaluating this project’s
proposed density.
• The zoning for this site not only allows for residential density of 1 unit/600 sq. ft, but also allows for
non -residential (commercial) intensity of up to a 1.5 FAR (Floor Area Ratio). These are different
metrics, where density is based on number of units, and does not factor size of units, while FAR is
based on square footage. For this site, the 1.5 FAR would allow up to 41,051 sq. ft, which for this
site would translate to approximately two entire floors worth of the particular building.
In addition, although residential density is not regulated by square footage, the proposed project
hosts 120 units in approximately 81,442 sq. ft of building area dedicated to residential use, which
translates to an average of 678 sq. ft/unit. As an example, a building of the same size could be
proposed as:
o 45 units in 6 stories, with the average unit being 1,809 sq. ft/unit,
o 61 units (State density bonus max) in the same 6 stories, with the average unit being 1,313 sq.
ft/unit.
Given the need for housing in San Rafael as well as throughout the State, staff would assert that a
greater number of smaller units as proposed would be more beneficial to the community. This is
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case Nos: UP18-008/ED18-018/LLA18-001
703-723 Third St/898 Lincoln Ave
August 27, 2019
Page 18
an opportunity site, close to transit, in the heart of downtown and is possibly the most appropriate
location for higher density housing. It would also serve as a catalyst for other downtown housing
projects
• As noted above, other factors to consider for density include height, design, environmental
resources (including historical), parking and traffic capacity:
o For height discussion, see below.
o The design was evaluated and reviewed by the DRB, and through the process, there have been
changes to provide additional stepping of upper floors as well as horizontal articulation, to
reduce perceived bulk and mass from all four building elevations.
o The site has no historical or environmental resources, given it is fully graded and developed
with non-descript, postmodern commercial buildings.
o The traffic generation from the project was evaluated against the City’s level of service
standards. A Transportation Impact Analysis report (Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants,
revision dated January 14, 2019) originally submitted for the project was revised to expand the
study area and to modify the methodology used in the analysis. The results of the updated trip
generation indicate that, based on traffic counts of existing land use trips, and with deductions
applied for ‘walk, bike and transit’ trips due to the site’s proximity to the Downtown, the SMART
station and the transit center, the project would result in 33 net new AM peak hour trips (7- 9am
weekdays) and 26 PM net new peak hour trips (4-6pm weekdays).
▪ The Transportation Impact Analysis report indicates surrounding intersections and
arterials would continue to operate (existing plus project volumes) acceptably per
the City’s LOS (Level of Service) standards in the General Plan
▪ The results of the Transportation Impact Analysis report have been confirmed by the
City’s Traffic Engineer. Staff finds the proposed density (120 units) would result in
negligible traffic impacts which are off-set by the payment of traffic mitigation fees
on the 59 new peak hour trips anticipated to result from the project.
o In terms of parking, the project would provide excess parking than that required by the State
for projects in close proximity to transit. The project is required to provide 82 spaces and would
actually provide 121 total spaces (composed of 109 resident parking + 12 ADA, ride share, drop
off and EV parking spaces)
Staff recommends that the Proposed Project scenario, which includes the voluntary increase in
affordability, is appropriate, given that; 1) the project does not utilize most of the non-residential FAR
allowance for the site, 2) the smaller size of units, averaging 678 sq. ft./unit, and 3) the project location.
Height/Scale
The 2/3 MUE zoning allows a 54 ft height limit with a 12 ft height bonus (for a total of 66 ft height limit) for
projects that provide the required amount of affordable housing. As designed, the project proposes a
building at 73 ft tall, exceeding the height limit by 7 feet. The height is measured to the top of the roof deck
and the other architectural features on the roof deck (railing, and elevator overruns, trellises) do not count
toward the maximum building height.
During Conceptual Design Review by the Board and Planning Commission, the project was designed to
meet the 66 ft height limit. That design proposed to bury the garage level by 1 ft below the elevation of the
sidewalks. Following Conceptual Review, technical comments from City Departments and further
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case Nos: UP18-008/ED18-018/LLA18-001
703-723 Third St/898 Lincoln Ave
August 27, 2019
Page 19
investigation into the stacked parking lift, the project was increased in height by 7 feet, from 66 feet to 73
feet, based on the following modifications:
• FEMA requirements require the garage level to be a +1 ft above the current grade. Therefore, a +2
ft increase of height resulted by placing the ground level at +1 ft above current elevation
• Further investigation into the stacker systems resulted in the need for 3.5 ft of additional height in
the garage level for the proposed stacker system, raising the garage plate height from 18.5 ft to 22
ft in height.
• Plate heights for the residential levels were increased from 9 ft to 9.5 ft, resulting in a 2.5 ft net
change to overall height.
Given that the proposed height exceeds the 66 ft height limit, the applicant ha s requested a major
concession under the state density bonus law to request 7 additional feet. Concessions not identified
14.16.030.H.3.a are considered a major concession and require submittal of a financial pro forma SRMC
14.16.030.H.3.b.v),. If approved, the concession counts concession under the State Density Bonus law.
Per SRMC 14.16.030. A major concession requires the submittal of a financial pro forma to demonstrate
whether the concession or incentive is necessary to achieve the offered affordability and make the project
financially feasible (Government Code, § 65915(k)(3). As noted above, the City hired S eifel Consulting
to review the financial pro forma and confirm the methodologies, assumptions and conclusions (Exhibit
6). In conclusion, the 3 rd party economist has concluded that the pro forma does use sound assumptions,
methodologies and financial information, and that the pro forma demonstrate s that 62 Base Case project
would not be financially feasible, while the 120-unit Proposed Project is needed to make the project
financially feasible.
Staff does note that there are two variables to the height needs of this project, amount of parking provided
and residential floor plate heights.
• As previously noted, the project is required to provide 82 on-site parking spaces based on State
Density Bonus law that requires 0.5 spaces/bedroom. The project proposes to provide 33 more
parking spaces than required (121 provided vs 85-86 required) as an amenity and need for the
residential units. The amount of proposed parking would generally equal 1 space per unit.
The extra parking necessitates the need to either create two floors of parking or utilize a stacked
parking system. Although it is conceivable possible to dig down and provide one floor of parking
underground, the small size of the lot, FEMA requirements coupled with the high-water table would
make this option nearly impossible. The other option is to only provide one level of parking without
stackers, which would only require a 10 ft floor plate (rather than 22 ft) on the ground level.
However, this option would not only render the project inconsistent with the parking requirements
(only 66 spaces could be provided without use of parking stackers, where 82 are required), but also
insufficient to meet the real-life parking demands of potential tenants in this project.
• The second variable is that of the plate height in the residential units. The project proposes to use
9.5 ft plate heights. This plate height is typical of other stacked housing projects and given the
smaller size of units, would make the units feel a bit bigger than if a lower plate height was utilized.
If the plate height was reduced back to 9 ft, that would reduce overall building height by 3.5 feet, or
69.5 feet total. Although this would be a reduction in height, it would still exceed the height limit (66
ft with height bonus) and would be negligible in the bigger picture. Furthermore, the extra 0.5 feet
of plate height would make the units for desirable and comfortable for residents, especially given
their smaller size.
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case Nos: UP18-008/ED18-018/LLA18-001
703-723 Third St/898 Lincoln Ave
August 27, 2019
Page 20
Front Setback
The project requests a waiver of the required 5’ landscaped front setback (Third St. frontage) also as a
concession under the State Density Bonus law for meeting their required 20% affordable housing
requirement. This concession requesting a waiver of the required 5’ landscaped front setback, like the
additional 75-unit density bonus above the maximum allowed under the State Density Bonus law, is
discretionary, allows staff to hire a consulting economist for peer review (at the applicant’s cost) and
requires City Council review and approval. At the time of formal project submittal, the applicant provided
a financial pro forma demonstrating that the waiver of the required 5’ landscaped front setback results in
“identifiable, financially sufficient and actual cost reductions” (underline added) to the project.
Aside from the state density bonus law provisions for the city to grant a concession to a standard if deemed
financially necessary, staff has also reviewed whether the proposed 0 ft setback would be in keeping with
the surrounding area. Most of the buildings along 3rd St exhibit a 0-ft setback. A few properties have
portions of their sites that include parking lots, which creates a bigger setback for that portion of the site.
However, the predominant pattern of building placement is without any setback and this project would be
consistent with that pattern. In addition, given the minimum dimensions requires for parking and drive
aisles, coupled with the required “back of house” features needed on the ground floor for a project of this
type (lobby, retail space, bike lockers, mail, trash, there is not much room to reduce the width of the building
on the ground floor. Lastly, as noted above, the applicant has submitted a financial pro forma and this was
reviewed by an independent economist and the conclusion is the number of units are necessary to make
the project financially feasible. In regard to the setback, the issue is that there is a minimum width required
for a double loaded garage. In addition, complying with the required front setback is challenging due to the
parking, double-width driveway and mechanical/utility/refuse infrastructure that are also provided on the
ground floor; however, the project sponsor has indicated their intent to monitor future demand for increased
ground-floor commercial space within the project and a potential interest to convert or reconfigure the
‘Lobby’ area into additional retail use, which would have the effect of activating the pedestrian presence at
the southeast corner of Third St/.Lincoln Ave.
Bulk/Mass
The currently design project has greatly improved in terms of its impacts to bulk/mass. The prior design
included projections over the public right of way, as well as a more vertical building design. The currently
proposed design has eliminated all projections over the public right of way, inset balconies and stepback
portions of the upper-stories to create horizonal relief, and fully recessed the 6th floor back five feet (5’). In
addition, the project uses some varying roof heights on the top level to provide vertical articulation.
Stacker Parking System:
Stacked parking systems are a new concept to the City of San Rafael but are much more common in other
parts of the Bay Area. With the limited availability of land, and high land costs, efficient use of parking
should be encouraged. Given that our Zoning Ordinance does not yet acknowledge stacked parking, the
applicant has requested a Use Permit for a modification to the parking standards. The type of parking lifts
proposed for this site are a puzzle lift system with three-levels of semi-automatic horizontal and vertical
shifting platforms. A driver is required to manually engage the system which automatically moves the
parking platforms to an available empty space. Access may be secured by adding sliding metal wire doors
which are opened by the driver only after the shifting process is completed. Staff is very supportive of
stacked parking system
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD RECOMMENDATION
The Board has reviewed this project on two occasions.
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case Nos: UP18-008/ED18-018/LLA18-001
703-723 Third St/898 Lincoln Ave
August 27, 2019
Page 21
June 20, 2017 - The Board reviewed the originally submitted design of the project as a Conceptual Design
Review application and provided the following general comments. (Commissioner Schaefer served as PC
liason):
• Site requires a heightened ‘gateway’ design. The concept design is too boxy and should incorporate
greater vertical and horizontal articulation.
• Massing of concept design is looming due to crowding of sidewalk right-of-way with upper-story
encroachments. Limit ROW encroachments to architectural features only and reduce to maintain
pedestrian-friendly cross-streets (Tamalpais and Lincoln Avenues).
• Portions of the upper stories should step back.
• Ext. color palette is too bright.
• Ground floor commercial space along Tamalpais Ave. is important link to pedestrian-friendly vision.
• Provide comprehensive and generous amenities in common areas, including trellis over portions
of the courtyard. Consider adding a gym and enlarging the rooftop common area.
• Consider cladding staircase towers in glass or a similar design feature.
• Guest parking, EV charging stations and a loading/unloading area should be provided in the
garage.
• Limit the driveway curb cuts on pedestrian-friendly cross-streets by providing a single drive-thru
driveway and better garage circulation; and
• Board is supportive of mechanical parking lifts though additional details are needed, including
dimensions, queuing, turning access, cross-sections, real-time video of use.
May 7, 2019 - The Board reviewed the formal project for site and building design and unanimously (4 -0-2
vote; PC Liaison Davidson) recommended approval of the site and building design with enhanced
“Gateway Corner” (Third St. and Tamalpais Ave.) façade treatments (unique materials and colors).
Video from each Board meeting may be viewed at www.cityofsanrafael.org/meetings and then clicking on
archived “Design Review Board” meetings, and selecting video from the meeting date (June 20, 2017
and/or May 7, 2019).
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15060, staff conducted a “preliminary review” of the project application,
plans and supportive studies and reports. In completing this preliminary review, staff determined that the
application is defined as a “project” under CEQA. Next, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 (Review for
Exemption) was reviewed to determine whether the project is exempt from CEQA. A project is exempt
from CEQA if it qualifies for a Categorical Exemption under Article 19, Section 15300. Given the project
location, scope and use, staff has determined that the project qualifies for an exemption under CEQA
Guidelines Section 15332. Section 15332 exempts “infill development projects” that meet the following
conditions:
a. The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan
policies as well as with applicable zoning designations and regulations.
b. The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres
substantially surrounded by urban uses.
c. The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.
d. Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects related to traffic, noise, air quality,
or water quality.
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case Nos: UP18-008/ED18-018/LLA18-001
703-723 Third St/898 Lincoln Ave
August 27, 2019
Page 22
e. The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.
Lastly, CEQA Guideline Section 15300.2 set forth a list of “exceptions” to the application of a Categorical
Exemption. There are five exceptions that if any apply, would negate application of the proposed
Categorical Exemption. A review of these exceptions reveals that none apply:
1. Location: The project site is already developed with commercial and parking uses and in not located
in a sensitive environment. The site does not contain sensitive habitat. It is not located in an area
of critical or hazardous concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted
pursuant to law by federal, state, or local agencies.
2. Cumulative Impact: Based on the lack of significant proposed nearby developments, there is no
evidence of a potential significant cumulative impact on the environment from the proposed project.
It has been determined that the project will not cumulatively impact traffic, noise, air quality, or water
quality.
3. Significant Effect and Unusual Circumstances: The project would not result in any significant effects
on the environment due to unusual circumstances. Based on completed environmental studies for
the project, the project site does not have any unusual circumstances that would negatively impact
the environment.
4. Scenic Highways: The project site is not in proximity or visible to any designated scenic highway
based on the State of California’s Scenic Highway program.
5. Hazardous Waste Sites: Based on Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment prepared for the
project (see Section C, item 3), the site is not located on a list of identified hazardous waste sites
designated by the State of California.
6. Historical resources: There are no historical resources located on the proposed project site.
Therefore, staff recommends that the project would qualify for a categorical exemption and staff has drafted
a Notice of Exemption (NOE) (see Exhibit 7) which provides greater detail on how the project qualifies for
a Class 32 CEQA exemption. All the supporting studies used to evaluate the project are provided at
https://www.cityofsanrafael.org/703-3/.
NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING / CORRESPONDENCE
A neighborhood meeting is not required; however, the applicant has previously met with the Gerstle Park
Neighborhood Association, the Montecito Homeowners Association and the Federation of San Rafael
Neighborhoods to discuss and solicit input on the proposed project
Notice of Conceptual Review, by both the Board and the Planning Commission, the study session by the
Planning Commission, and formal project review by the DRB and this Planning Commission hearing was
conducted in accordance with noticing requirements contained in Chapter 29 of the Zoning Ordinance. A
Notice of Public Meeting was mailed to all property owners, residents, businesses and occupants within a
300-foot radius of the project site and the appropriate neighborhood groups (the Downtown Business
Improvement District, Gerstle Park Neighborhood Assn. and the Federation of San Rafael Neighborhoods),
a minimum of 15 calendar days prior to the date of this hearing. Additionally, notice was posted on the
project site, along the Third St., Tamalpais Ave. and Lincoln Ave. frontages.
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case Nos: UP18-008/ED18-018/LLA18-001
703-723 Third St/898 Lincoln Ave
August 27, 2019
Page 23
Notice of this Planning Commission meeting was also provided through mailed notices to property
owner/residents/business within 300 feet of the site, as well as applicable neighborhood/business
associations and posted along all three frontages on the site.
Public comments received by staff on the project are evenly mixed; some in support of the project
proposing downtown housing and others in opposition to the project design, bulk/mass, height, and
perceived parking and traffic impacts. Public comments received through the conceptual review, during
the previous proposed design, are attached as Exhibit 8. Public comments received on the project, since
formal project review, with a revised improved design, are attached as Exhibit 9. Any comments received
after distribution of the staff report, will be forwarded to the Commission under separate cover.
Planning staff has also created a digital webpage on the project which has been uploaded with links to
both the current plans and supportive studies and is updated to coordinate with all meeting and hearing
notices for the project. This project webpage may be found at https://www.cityofsanrafael.org/703-3/.
CONCLUSION
The project has been revised and refined since the original Conceptual Design Review in 2017 and
appears to have addressed many of the main concerns. Through these revisions, the building no longer
projects over the right of way, a commercial space has been added to the ground floor, the building design
has improved to reflect the gateway location, and the number of units has been reduced to 120 units.
However, through the revisions, the building height has increased from 66 ft to 73 feet to address some
technical requirements (flood zone, mechanical puzzle stackers).
Through the process, the project has increased affordability to off-set the proposed additional density,
which has been provided; the project has increased the number of BMR units, from 9 to 12 BMR units by
voluntarily proposing 3 additional BMR units at the moderate-income level for a fixed 10-year term, which
exceeds the required affordability for the project (5 BMR units at the very low-income level and 4 BMR
units at the low-income level).
The project request three concessions under the state density bonus provisions (density, height and front
setback). A financial pro forma has been submitted and reviewed by an independent economic who
concluded that the assumptions and methodologies are sound and that the concessions are necessary to
make the project financially feasible.
In evaluating the project at this site, staff finds that this site is one of the most appropriate locations in the
entire City to add a significant amount of housing , especially smaller sized units. The proximity to transit,
downtown and transportation make this an ideal location for new housing. The size of the project has been
demonstrated to be necessary to make it economically viable, given the high land and construction costs.
In addition, smaller rental units are a housing type that are needed in the community. Furthermore, the site
is listed as a housing opportunity site in the General Plan and envisioned for greater height and density
through the Station Area Plan.
The Planning Commission is requested to review and make recommendations on the project prior to the
City Council taking final action.
EXHIBITS
1. Vicinity/Location map
2. Draft Resolution recommending approval of the project to the City Council
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case Nos: UP18-008/ED18-018/LLA18-001
703-723 Third St/898 Lincoln Ave
August 27, 2019
Page 24
3. GP Consistency Table
4. ZO Consistency Table
5. Summary of “Good Design Principals” for Downtown
6. Pro Forma Review and Financial Feasibility Analysis, Seifel Consulting, Inc., February 19, 2019
7. Draft Notice of Exemption, January 21, 2019
8. Public comments through DRB Formal Project Review
9. Public comments since DRB Formal Project Review
Reduced (11” x 17”) color plan sets have been provided to the Planning Commissioners only. Digital
copy of the project plans can be viewed at https://www.cityofsanrafael.org/703-3/.
Exhibit 2
File Nos. UP18-008, ED18-018, & LLA18-001 1
RESOLUTION NO. 19-
RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING TO THE
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A USE PERMIT (UP18-008), ENVIRONMENTAL AND
DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT (ED18-018) AND LOT LINE CONSOLIDATION (LLA18-001) TO
ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF 120-RESIDENTIAL ‘RENTAL’ UNIT, 73’-TALL, NEW
MIXED-USE BUILDING WITH 121 MECHANICAL GARAGE PARKING LIFT AND 969 SQ. FT.
OF GROUND-FLOOR COMMERCIAL SPACE WITH HEIGHT AND DENSITY BONUSES AND
A FRONT SETBACK WAIVER, LOCATED ON TWO ADJACENT DOWNTOWN PARCELS AT
703-723 THIIRD ST. AND 898 LINCOLN AVE.
(APNS: 011-278-01 & -02)
WHEREAS, on March 2, 2017, Planning staff completed Pre-application review (PA16-
007) of a proposal to construct a new, 74.5’-tall, residential building with 138 residential units
above 152 garage parking spaces, and requesting height and density bonuses and a front
setback waiver (Based on limits prescribed by the City’s General Plan and the Zoning
Ordinance, the maximum density for the project site is 45 residential units without a State
density bonus and the maximum height is 66’); and
WHEREAS, on June 20, 2017, the Design Review Board (Board) provided Conceptual
Design Review comments on the project, which reduced the height of the building, from 74.5’ to
66’, and the on-site parking, from 152 to 143 mechanical parking lifts, though continued the
density of 138 residential ‘rental’ units with density and height bonuses and a front setback
waiver. The Board’s comments included the need for a higher-quality ‘Gateway’ design that
eliminates upper-story projections over the sidewalk and incorporates upper-story ‘stepbacks’
and ground-floor commercial space, particularly along the Tamalpais Avenue frontage; and
WHEREAS, on July 25, 2017, the Planning Commission (Planning Commission) also
provided Conceptual Design Review comments on the project that were similar to the Board’s
comments, but also recommended the minimizing driveways/driveway widths along the
Tamalpais Avenue frontage and providing high-quality design on all building elevations,
including the rear elevation adjacent to the Marin Color Service site at 770 2nd St.; and
WHEREAS, on March 22, 2018, formal project applications were submitted to the
Community Development Department, Planning Division, requesting a Use Permit (UP18-008),
an Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED18-018) and a Lot Line Consolidation (LLA18-
001) for the current project, which reduced the density, from 138 to 120 residential ‘rental’ units,
and the on-site parking, from 143 to 121 mostly mechanical parking lifts, while increasing the
height of the building, from 66’ to 73’ and providing a 969 sq. ft. ground-floor commercial space.
The formal project continued to request density and height bonuses and a front setback waiver;
and
WHEREAS, on February 26, 2019, the Planning Commission held a study session to
provide preliminary comments, at the request of staff, on miscellaneous policy areas, including
the requested density bonus, height bonus and front setback waiver, and the proposed
mechanical parking lifts and the draft environmental (CEQA) findings. The Planning
Commission indicated their support for the current project, including staff’s preliminary
determination that the project is exempt from CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act),
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (In-Fill Development Projects). However, the
Commission suggested that the project should explore providing greater affordability given the
Exhibit 2
File Nos. UP18-008, ED18-018, & LLA18-001 2
amount of density bonus and improving the Tamalpais/Third St elevation for better gateway
design; and
WHEREAS, the project has voluntarily increased the proposed affordability, from nine
(9) Below-Market-Rate (BMR) units (5 units at very low-income household levels and 4 units at
low-income household levels) to 12 BMR units (5 units at very low-income household levels and
4 units at low-income household levels plus 3 units at the moderate-income household levels);
and
WHEREAS, on May 7, 2019, the Board reviewed the formal project for site and building
design and unanimously (4-0-2 vote with Board Member Kent and Paul absent; with PC Liaison
Davidson) recommended approval of the site and building design with enhanced “Gateway
Corner” (Third St. and Tamalpais Ave.) façade treatments (unique materials and colors); and
WHEREAS, on August 27, 2019, the San Rafael Planning Commission (Planning
Commission) held a duly noticed a hearing to consider a Use Permit (UP18-008), an
Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED18-018) and a Lot Line Consolidation (LLA18-
001) applications, accepted and considered all oral and written public testimony and the written
report of Planning staff; and
WHEREAS, the custodian of documents which constitute the record of proceedings
upon which this decision is based is the Community Development Department; and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the Planning Commission of the City of San
Rafael does hereby make the following findings related to the applications for Use Permit
(UP18-008), Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED18-018) and Lot Line Consolidtion
(LLA18-001):
Use Permit (UP18-008)
Findings
A. The proposed residential use within a commercial zoning district and the proposed use
of mechanical parking lifts to provide on-site parking for the project, as revised and
conditioned, will be in accord with the San Rafael General Plan 2020, the objectives of
Title 14 of the San Rafael Municipal Code (the Zoning Ordinance) and the purposes of
the 2/3 MUE District, in which the project site is located, given that;
1. As documented in the General Plan 2020 Consistency Table (Exhibit 3), the
proposed project will implement and promote the goals and policies of the San
Rafael General Plan 2020;
2. As documented in the Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table (Exhibit 4), the
proposed project will be consistent with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance;
and
3. The proposed project will be consistent with the purposes of the 2/3 MUE
District, given that; a) The project will create multifamily residential use in the 2/3
MUE District, a commercial zoning district, as part of mixed-use development; b)
The project will provide a wide variety of housing opportunities in mixed-use
districts in terms of housing type (market-rate and affordable residential ‘rental’
units) and sizes (studio units 342 - 539 sq. ft. in size, 1-bedroom units 545 - 795
sq. ft. in size, and 2-bedroom units 899 - 1,068 sq. ft. in size, c) The project will
help promote San Rafael's Downtown area as a viable commercial and financial
Exhibit 2
File Nos. UP18-008, ED18-018, & LLA18-001 3
center, and as an urban center with a mixture of civic, social, entertainment,
cultural and residential uses due to its unique location in the Downtown, across
from the SMART Downtown station and in close proximity of the relocated Bettini
Transit Center (whose exact location has not been determined at this time);
future residents are anticipated to frequent existing and future businesses in the
Downtown and help achieve the City’s goal of ‘alive-after-five’ by helping to
activate the Downtown in the evenings and on weekends; and d) The project will
help create an inviting appearance along Third St. frontage by installing new
street trees and raised Corten steel landscape planters along all three building
frontages (Third St., Lincoln Ave. and Tamalpais Ave.).
B. The proposed residential use within a commercial zoning district and the proposed use
of mechanical parking lifts to provide on-site parking for the project, as revised and
conditioned, will not be detrimental to the public healrth, safety or welfare, or materially
injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity, or to the general welfare of the
City, given that; the project has been reviewed by appropriate City departments, non-
City agencies, the appropriate surrounding neighborhood groups (Downtown Business
Improvement District, Federation of San Rafael Neighborhoods, Gerstle Park
Neighborhood Assoc., Montecito Area Residents Assoc. Lincoln-San Rafael Hill
Neighborhood Assoc.and Bret Harte Community Assoc.), interested parties, the Design
Review Board at two (2) separate meetings (conceptual review on June 20, 2017 and
formal project review on May 7, 2019) and the Planning Commission on two (2)
separate occasions (conceptual review on July 25, 2017 and study session on February
26, 2019) and conditions of approval have been included to mitigate any potential
negative impacts anticipated to be generated by the proposed project;
In addition, the proposed mechanical parking lift system has been used in other
residential development projects, in similar settings and has proven to be effective and
safe mechanism to provide stacked parking. Lastly, appropriate measures have been
included in the project, as a condition of approval, to establish backup methods should
the mechanical parking lift fail in a power outage; and
C. The proposed residential use within a commercial zoning district and the proposed use
of mechanical parking lifts to provide on-site parking for the project, as revised and
conditioned, will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance,
given that; as documented in the Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table (Exhibit 4).
Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED18-018)
Findings
A. The project design, as revised and conditioned, will be in accordance with the San
Rafael General Plan 2020, the objectives of Title 14 of the San Rafael Municipal Code
(the Zoning Ordinance) and the purposes of Chapter 25 of the Zoning Ordinance
(Environmental and Design Review Permits), given that;
1. As documented in the General Plan 2020 Consistency Table (Exhibit 3), the
proposed project will implement and promote the goals and policies of the San
Rafael General Plan 2020;
2. As documented in the Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table (Exhibit 4), the
proposed project will be consistent with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance;
and
Exhibit 2
File Nos. UP18-008, ED18-018, & LLA18-001 4
3. The proposed project will be consistent with the purposes of Environmental and
Design Review Permits, given that; the project will maintain and improve the
quality of, and relationship between, development and the surrounding area to
contribute to the attractiveness of the City. The revised project design proposes
a contemporary design, similar to the nearby BioMarin campus buildings, though
with unique façade treatments (brick with Corten steel planters at the ground
level and a mixture of stucco and vertical and horizontal fiber cement board
siding at the upper levels), greater articulation, stepping back the upper stories
and a more ‘residential’ window proportion. The proposed 6-story scale was
reviewed and supported by both the Board and the Planning Commission during
conceptual design review, the Commission again during study session review
and the Board again during formal project review and supported. The project
design has been revised to provide equal, high-quality design attention to all four
building elevations, including the rear elevation which is shared with 770 Second
St. Better vertical and horizontal articulation and stepbacks of upper stories have
been incorporated into the revised project design. In addition, previously
proposed upper-story projections or encroachments over the sidewalk have been
eliminated. Extensive landscaping in the form of street trees and Corten steel
raise planter along all three street fronts is proposed to help create a pedestrian
scale. The project proposes to orient pedestrian activity through the lobby area
both through the main entry on Third St and at the northwest corner of Third
St./Lincoln Ave. Photo simulations were conducted on the project and submitted
by the applicant, which indicated minor view impacts from public vantage points.
B. The project design, as revised and conditioned, is consistent with all applicable site,
architecture and landscaping design criteria and guidelines for the Second/Third St.
Mixed-Use East (2/3 MUE) District in which the project site is located, given that;
1. The project design will be consistent with the maximum allowable density for the
site, which is 45 units based on 27,367 sq. ft. of total lot area, subject to requests
for automatic and discretionary density bonuses under the State Density Bonus
law after meeting mandatory affordable housing requirements;
2. The project will be consistent with the maximum height allowed (Uniform Building
Code 1997) for the project site, which is 54’, subject to requests for automatic
and discretionary height bonuses under the State Density Bonus law after
meeting mandatory affordable housing requirements;
3. The project will be consistent with the minimum required yard setbacks, which is
limited to a 5’ front (Third St. frontage) setback, subject to a request for setba ck
waiver under the State Density Bonus law after meeting mandatory affordable
housing requirements;
4. The project will be consistent with the minimum landscaping requirement for the
project site, which is 10% or 2,737 sq. ft. (The project proposes 12,555 sq . ft. of
site landscaping);
5. The project will be consistent with the maximum FAR (floor area ratio) allowed
on the project site by proposing 969 sq. ft. of ground-level commercial space
located at the northeast corner of the project site, at the corner of Third St and
Tamalpais Ave. This represents 0.035 FAR where a maximum 1.5 FAR or
41,050.5 sq. ft. of nonresidential develop is allowed on the project site in addition
to the residential density;
6. The project will voluntarily provide 12,408 sq. ft. of private and common outdoor
recreational area or an average of 103.4 sq. ft. of outdoor recreational area per
unit;
Exhibit 2
File Nos. UP18-008, ED18-018, & LLA18-001 5
7. The provisions of Marin Municipal Water District’s (MMWD) most recent water
conservation and new ‘graywater’ requirements apply to the project, where
MMWD approval is required prior to the issuance of any building or grading
permit;
8. The proposed project will be consistent with review criteria for Environmental and
Design Review Permits (Chapter 14.25 of the Zoning Ordinance), by proposing a
consistent, high-quality architectural design (colors and materials; scale; bulk
and mass; fenestration and articulation) throughout the project site; and
9. The formal project design was reviewed and recommended for approval by the
Design Review Board (Board) on May 7, 2019.
C. The project design, as revised and conditioned, minimizes adverse environmental
impacts, given that;
1. The project site is completely developed and disturbed neither contains, nor is
immediately contiguous to, recognizable wetlands, creeks or similarly sensitive
environmental features, and it has not been identified in the San Rafael General
Plan 2020 (Exhibit 38 – Threatened and Endangered Species) as a general
location were threatened and endangered species have been previously
observed or maintain a suitable habitat for their likely presence to be found; and
2. The project design minimizes adverse environmental impacts, given that: a
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review and clearance was
prepared, based on supporting studies submitted with the project, substantiating
a Categorical Exemption (Class 32; In-Fill Development Projects), as determined
by a draft Notice of Exemption (NOE), dated January 21, 2019 (Exhibit 7).
D. The project design, as revised and conditioned, will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the
vicinity, or to the general welfare of the City, given that; the project has been reviewed
by appropriate City departments, non-City agencies, the appropriate surrounding
neighborhood groups (Downtown Business Improvement District, Federation of San
Rafael Neighborhoods, Gerstle Park Neighborhood Assoc., Montecito Area Residents
Assoc. Lincoln-San Rafael Hill Neighborhood Assoc. and Bret Harte Community
Assoc.), interested parties, the Design Review Board at two (2) separate meetings
(conceptual review on June 20, 2017 and formal project review on May 7, 2019) and the
Planning Commission on two (2) separate occasions (conceptual review on July 25,
2017 and study session on February 26, 2019) and conditions of approval have been
included to mitigate any potential negative impacts anticipated to be generated by the
proposed project.
Lot Line Consolidation
Findings
A. The proposed lot line consolidation is consistent with the San Rafael General Plan 2020
and any pertinent specific plan or neighborhood plan; given that: the use of the project
site would be mixed-use (both residential and non-residential uses) in compliance with
the Second/Third Street Mixed-Use (2/3MU) General Plan Land Use designation, and
would not result in the creation of any new lots but, rather, would reduce the two (2)
existing legal Downtown parcels into one (1).
B. The proposed lot line consolidation is in conformance with the Zoning Ordinance (Title
14) and any other pertinent municipal code provisions, given that; the consolidated
Exhibit 2
File Nos. UP18-008, ED18-018, & LLA18-001 6
parcel would be in conformance with the development standards for the Second/Third
Mixed Use East (2/3 MUE) District, including minimum lot area, lot width and
landscaping and maximum floor area ratio (FAR), with the exception of height, density
and front setback, and the applicant has requested concessions to these standards
under the State Density Bonus law. The proposed Lot Line Consolidation would not
result in any change to the existing zoning classification or approve a change in use or
additional construction which would conflict with these zoning classifications and
development standards.
C. The proposed lot line consolidation is in conformance with the Uniform Building Code
(UBC), given that; the project application submittal has been reviewed by the
Community Development Department, Building Division, and determined to be in
conformance with the applicable California Building Code (CBC) or UBC regulations.
Density Bonus /Concessions/Waivers
Findings
A. The project complies with the City’s affordable housing requirement, pursuant to SRMC
Section 14.16.030, by providing 20% (9 units) of the maximum base density (45 units)
as “affordable” or Below-Market-Rate (BMR) units, with five (5) BMR units affordable to
very low-income households and four (4) affordable to low-income households.
B. By meeting the City’s affordable housing requirement, the project is automatically
eligible for a State Density Bonus of up to 35% (16 additional market-rate units) and up
to three (3) concessions.
C. By also meeting the City’s affordable housing requirement, the project is automatically
eligible for a twelve-foot (12’) height bonus under both the General Plan and SRMC
Section 14.16.190, from 54’ to 66’.
D. The project proposes three (3) discretionary concessions/waivers: 1) An additional 59-
unit discretionary density bonus above the 35% density bonus provided by the State
Density Bonus law; 2) An additional seven-foot (7’) height bonus above the height bonus
allowed by the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance; and 3) A waiver from the required
five-foot (5’) landscaped front setback.
E. All three of the proposed concessions/waivers requested by the applicant, are
considered major concessions (SRMC 14.16.030.H.3.b.v) and therefore are subject to
approval of the City Council and require that the applicant demonstrate through a
financial pro forma that the concessions are needed to make the project financially
feasible. As part of the formal submittal, a financial pro forma was submitted by the
developer
F. The pro forma evaluates the Base Case Project (61 units, which includes the 35%
density bonus) as well as the Proposed Project (120 units). The actual pro forma and
specific numbers contained in the pro forma are proprietary information and the City is
not allowed to release those for public review. However, the City’s consulting economist
has reviewed all the information and prepared their analysis that provides the
conclusions of their review (Exhibit 6 of staff report). In summary, the review finds:
a. The Base Case scenario (61 units, which includes the 35% density bonus) is not
financially feasible. Based on the development costs, revenues and return
Exhibit 2
File Nos. UP18-008, ED18-018, & LLA18-001 7
metrics, the developer margin would be negative, meaning the development
costs would exceed the revenues, and thus make the project not feasible to
build. The review also concludes that with even with potential savings on
construction costs through value engineering, the Base Case scenario is not
feasible and as the return margin would still be negative.
b. The Proposed Project scenario (120 units, including a 59-unit bonus above the
state density bonus) does yield a positive margin of return. However, that return
is does not achieve a high enough margin to be financially feasible according to
typical return metrics. The review does conclude that if construction costs are
lowered by 15%, it would be within the range of development feasibility,
consistent with other projects in high demand locations. The additional density
requested in the Proposed Project scenario enhances financial feasibility by
reducing development costs per housing unit.
c. Additionally, in response to the Planning Commission’s suggestion during the
study session to explore additional affordability, a third scenario was evaluated
by the City’s economist, which has been called Alternative 1. This scenario
evaluated a 120-unit project, of which 18 units (20% of the 59-unit additional
density bonus) are BMR units (10 very low-income household levels and 8 low-
income household levels). The review concludes that, given the significant
reduction in revenues from doubling the number of affordable housing units,
Alternative 1 is also not financially feasible without a significant reduction in
construction costs as the return margin would be negative.
G. In addition to the density bonus request, there are other considerations when evaluating
this project’s proposed density.
a. The zoning for this site not only allows for residential density of 1 unit/600 sq. ft,
but also allows for non -residential (commercial) intensity of up to a 1.5 FAR
(Floor Area Ratio). These are different metrics, where density is based on
number of units, and does not factor size of units, while FAR is based on square
footage. For this site, the 1.5 FAR would allow up to 41,051 sq. ft, which for this
site would translate to approximately two entire floors of this particular building.
b. Although residential density is not regulated by square footage, the proposed
project hosts 120 units in approximately 81,442 sq. ft of building area dedicated
to residential use, which translates to an average of 678 sq. ft/unit. As an
example, a building of the same size could be proposed as:
• 45 units in 6 stories, with the average unit being 1,809 sq. ft/unit,
• 61 units (State density bonus max) in the same 6 stories, with the
average unit being 1,313 sq. ft/unit.
Given the need for housing in San Rafael as well as throughout the State, the
Commission finds that a greater number of smaller units (120 units) as proposed
would be more beneficial to the community. This is an opportunity site, close to
transit, in the heart of downtown and is possibly the most appropriate location for
higher density housing. It would also serve as a catalyst for other downtown
housing projects
Exhibit 2
File Nos. UP18-008, ED18-018, & LLA18-001 8
H. Other factors to consider for density include height, design, environmental resources
(including historical), parking and traffic capacity:
a. For height the project is impacted by FEMA requirements that require a +2 ft
increase of height.
b. The stacker parking system requires a 22 ft first floor plate height.
c. Stepping of the building as well as provision of horizontal articulation have
resulted in additional height to address design related comments by the DRB as
means to reduce perceived bulk and mass from all four building elevations.
d. The site has no historical or environmental resources, given it is fully graded and
developed with non-descript, postmodern commercial buildings.
e. The traffic generation from the project was evaluated against the City’s level of
service standards. A Transportation Impact Analysis report (Fehr & Peers
Transportation Consultants, revision dated January 14, 2019) originally
submitted for the project was revised to expand the study area and to modify the
methodology used in the analysis. The results of the updated trip generation
indicate that, based on traffic counts of existing land use trips, and with
deductions applied for ‘walk, bike and transit’ trips due to the site’s proximity to
the Downtown, the SMART station and the transit center, the project would result
in 33 net new AM peak hour trips (7- 9am weekdays) and 26 PM net new peak
hour trips (4-6pm weekdays).
▪ The Transportation Impact Analysis report indicates surrounding
intersections and arterials would continue to operate (existing plus project
volumes) acceptably per the City’s LOS (Level of Service) standards in
the General Plan
▪ The results of the Transportation Impact Analysis report have been
confirmed by the City’s Traffic Engineer. Staff finds the proposed density
(120 units) would result in negligible traffic impacts which are off-set by
the payment of traffic mitigation fees on the 59 new peak hour trips
anticipated to result from the project.
f. In terms of parking, the project would provide excess parking than that required
by the State for projects in close proximity to transit. The project is required to
provide 82 spaces and would actually provide 121 total spaces (composed of
109 resident parking + 12 ADA, ride share, drop off and EV parking spaces)
I. The city’s consulting 3rd party economist has determined that the proposed additional
density bonus, height bonus and setback waiver all result in “identifiable, financially
sufficient and actual cost reductions” (underline added) to the project (see Exhibit 6 of
the staff report).
Exhibit 2
File Nos. UP18-008, ED18-018, & LLA18-001 9
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Findings
Pursuant to CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) Guidelines Section 15061, the
proposed project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (In-Fill
Development Projects).
Based on supporting studies submitted with the project and as documented in the Notice of
Exemption (Exhibit 6 to staff’s report), a Class 32 categorical exemption under the CEQA
Guidelines applies to this in-fill development project by meeting specific criteria listed below:
a) The project is consistent with all applicable General Plan and policies and Zoning
Ordinance regulations as documented by the attached consistency tables (see
Exhibits 3 and 4);
b) The proposed development is located with the city limits on a project site no more
than five (5) acres substantially surrounded by urban uses given that the project site
is comprised of two adjacent Downtown parcels with 27,367 sq. ft. (0.63 acre) of
total combined area. The project is located within the jurisdictional boundaries of the
City of San Rafael and is surrounded by urban development;
c) The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, are or threatened species
given that a Biological Assessment was completed on the project site which
determined no critical habitat exist among the biological resources;
d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant impacts to traffic, noise, air
quality or water quality given that appropriate studies were conducted, submitted
and reviewed by the appropriate city departments. The results are that no significant
impacts would result from the project which cannot be mitigated with standard
conditions of approvals
e) The project site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services
given that the site is currently served, and will continue to be served, by City services
and non-city agency service providers and the applicable service providers have
indicated, through design or conditions, support for the project.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the City of San Rafael
does hereby approve the Use Permit (UP18-008), Environmental and Design Review Permit
(ED18-018), and Lot Line Consolidation (LLA18-001), including the density bonus and
waivers/concessions, based on the findings of fact above and, subject to the following
conditions of approval:
Use Permit (UP18-008)
Conditions of Approval
General and On-Going
Community Development Department, Planning Division
1. This Use Permit approves development of 120 residential ‘rental’ units or apartments above
969 sq. ft. of ground-floor commercial space and 121 mechanical garage parking lifts, which
shall comply at all times with the adopted performance standards for residential uses in
commercial districts (currently Section 14.17.100 of the San Rafael Municipal Code or
SRMC).
Exhibit 2
File Nos. UP18-008, ED18-018, & LLA18-001 10
2. This Use Permit approves a Parking Modification to allow 109 of the 121 spaces to be
provided by mechanical jig saw lifts for the residents. The remaining 12 parking spaces are
to be provided as at-grade, non-mechanical lift parking spaces for electric vehicle (EV),
visitor, ADA and car share parking.
3. This Use Permit does not allow the subsequent conversion of the approved residential
‘rental’ units or apartments without a separate Tentative Map application submittal to the
Community Development Department, Planning Division, in compliance with Subdivision
Ordinance (currently Sections 15.02.02 - .04 of the SRMC), and review and approval by the
Planning Commission. It is strongly recommended that Tentative Map approval be obtained
prior to Building Permit issuance for the project. A Tentative Map application shall also
require submittal to amend this Use Permit and the Environmental and Design Review
Permit (ED18-018) for the project
4. This Use Permit requires the project to include a secondary or backup power source to
operate the mechanical parking lift system in case of power outage.
5. This Use Permit requires the project reserve a minimum of 82 mechanical parking spaces,
for exclusive use by the residents, which is the reduced parking requirement under the
State Density Bonus law.
6. This Use Permit requires the project reserve a minimum of three (3) on-site parking spaces
for the exclusive use by customers of the ground-floor commercial space, which is the
reduced parking requirement under the City’s parking code.
7. This Use Permit requires the project provide a minimum of four (4) short-term bicycle
parking spaces, in compliance with the adopted design standards (SRMC Section
14.18.090 (E), and accessible at all times.
8. This Use Permit shall require residents acknowledge, as part of their lease agreement, the
mixed-use nature of the Downtown and the understanding that living across the street from
the Downtown SMART Station may result in potentially increased noise.
9. This Use Permit shall run with the land and shall remain valid regardless of any change- of
ownership of the project site, subject to these conditions. This Use Permit will fully vest once
a building/grading permit is issued and ‘substantial construction’ is commenced or a time
extension request is submitted to the City’s Community Development Department, Planning
Division, within two (2) years of original approval, or Enter Council Date (‘Substantial
construction’ is defined as the pouring of all required foundations and the installation of
vertical components, such as exterior walls). Failure to obtain a grading/building permit and
commence ‘substantial construction’ or submit a time extension request by the specified
date will result in the expiration of this Use Permit.
10. This Use Permit shall run concurrently with the Environmental and Design Review Permit
(ED18-018) approval. If the Environmental and Design Review Permit approval expires, this
Use Permit approval shall also expire and become invalid.
Exhibit 2
File Nos. UP18-008, ED18-018, & LLA18-001 11
Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED18-018)
Conditions of Approval
General and On-Going
Community Development Department, Planning Division
1. The building techniques, colors, materials, elevations and appearance of the project, as
presented to the Planning Commission at their August 27, 2019 hearing, and on file with the
Community Development Department, Planning Division, shall be the same as presented to
the City Council and subject to these conditions. Minor modifications or revisions to the
project shall be subject to review and approval of the Community Development Department,
Planning Division. Further modifications deemed not minor by the Community Development
Director shall require review and approval by the original decision-making body, the City
Council, and may require review and recommendation by the City’s Planning Commission
and Design Review Board.
2. The approved colors for the project are on file with the Community Development
Department, Planning Division. Any future modification to the color palette shall be subject
to review and approval by the Planning Division and those modifications not deemed minor
shall be referred to the Design Review Board for review and recommendation prior to
approval by the Planning Division.
3. This Environmental and Design Review Permit approves the demolition of two existing
commercial buildings (a two-story commercial building at 703 Third St. and a one-story
commercial building at 723 Third St./898 Lincoln Ave.) and the construction of a 120-unit,
73’-tall, ‘rental’ residential or apartment building with 121 mechanical garage parking lifts
and 969 sq. ft. ground-floor commercial space.
4. All ‘off-haul’ of excavation and delivery/pick-up of construction equipment shall occur during
off-peak weekday hours, between 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday only.
5. Consistent with the standard noise ordinance requirements for construction (SRMC Chapter
8.13), all grading and construction activities shall be limited to 7 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday
through Friday, and 9 a.m. to 6 p.m., Saturdays. All grading and construction activities are
strictly prohibited on Sundays and State- or federally-recognized holidays.
6. Final landscape and irrigation plans for the project shall comply with the provisions of Marin
Municipal Water District’s (MMWD) most recent water conservation ordinance and
graywater recycling system requirements. Construction plans submitted for issuance of
building/grading permit shall be pre-approved by MMWD and stamped as approved by
MMWD or include a letter from MMWD approving the final landscape and irrigation plans.
Modifications to the final landscape and irrigation plans, as required by MMWD, shall be
subject to review and approval of the Community Development Department, Planning
Division.
7. All new landscaping shall be irrigated with an automatic drip system and maintained in a
healthy and thriving condition, free of weeds and debris, at all times. Any dying or dead
landscaping shall be replaced in a timely fashion.
Exhibit 2
File Nos. UP18-008, ED18-018, & LLA18-001 12
8. All site improvements, including but not limited to the site lighting, hardscape, and paving
striping shall be maintained in good, undamaged condition at all times. Any damaged
improvements shall be replaced in a timely manner.
9. The site shall be kept free of litter and garbage. Any trash, junk or damaged materials that
are accumulated on the site shall be removed and disposed of in a timely manner.
10. All public streets and sidewalks and on-site streets which are privately owned that are
impacted by the grading and construction operation for the project shall be kept clean and
free of debris at all times. The general contractor shall sweep the nearest street and
sidewalk adjacent to the site on a daily basis unless conditions require greater frequency of
sweeping.
11. All submitted building permit plan sets shall include a plan sheet incorporating these
conditions of approval.
12. If archaeological or cultural resources are accidentally discovered during excavation/grading
activities, all work will stop within 100 feet of the resource and the qualified archaeologist
will be notified immediately. The qualified archaeologist will contact Federated Indians of
Graton Rancheria (FIGR) and the Planning Division and coordinate the appropriate
evaluation of the find and implement any additional treatment or protection, if required. No
work shall occur in the vicinity until approved by the qualified archaeologist, FIGR and
Planning staff. Prehistoric resources that may be identified include, but shall not be limited
to, concentrations of stone tools and manufacturing debris made of obsidian, basalt and
other stone materials, milling equipment such as bedrock mortars, portable mortars and
pestles and locally darkened soils (midden) that may contain dietary remains such as shell
and bone, as well as human remains. Historic resources that may be identified include, but
are not limited to, small cemeteries or burial plots, structural foundations, cabin pads, cans
with soldered seams or tops, or bottles or fragments or clear and colored glass.
13. If human remains are encountered (or suspended) during any project-related activity, all
work will halt within 100 feet of the project and the County Coroner will be contacted to
evaluate the situation. If the County Coroner determines that the human remains are of
Native American origin, the County Coroner shall notify FIGR within 24-hours of such
identification who will work with Planning staff to determine the proper treatment of the
remains. No work shall occur in the vicinity without approval from Planning staff.
14. Applicant agrees to defend, indemnify, release and hold harmless the City, its agents,
officers, attorneys, employees, boards and commissions from any claim, action or
proceeding brought against any of the foregoing individuals or entities ("indemnities"), the
purpose of which is to attack, set aside, void or annul the approval of this application or the
adoption of any environmental document which accompanies it. This indemnification shall
include, but not be limited to, damages, costs, expenses, attorney fees or expert witness
fees that may be asserted or incurred by any person or entity, including the applicant, third
parties and the indemnities, arising out of or in connection with the approval of this
application, whether or not there is concurrent, passive or active negligence on the part of
the indemnities.
15. In the event that any claim, action or proceeding as described above is brought, the City
shall promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action or proceeding, and the City will
cooperate fully in the defense of such claim, action, or proceeding. In the event the
applicant is required to defend the City in connection with any said claim, action or
Exhibit 2
File Nos. UP18-008, ED18-018, & LLA18-001 13
proceeding, the City shall retain the right to: 1) approve the counsel to so defend the City; 2)
approve all significant decisions concerning the manner in which the defense is conducted;
and 3) approve any and all settlements, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld.
Nothing herein shall prohibit the City from participating in the defense of any claim, action or
proceeding, provided that if the City chooses to have counsel of its own to defend any claim,
action or proceeding where applicant already has retained counsel to defend the City in
such matters, the fees and the expenses of the counsel selected by the City shall be paid by
the City.
16. As a condition of this application, applicant agrees to be responsible for the payment of all
City Attorney expenses and costs, both for City staff attorneys and outside attorney
consultants retained by the City, associated with the reviewing, processing and
implementing of the land use approval and related conditions of such approval. City
Attorney expenses shall be based on the rates established from time to time by the City
Finance Director to cover staff attorney salaries, benefits, and overhead, plus the actual
fees and expenses of any attorney consultants retained by the City. Applicant shall
reimburse the City for City Attorney expenses and costs within thirty (30) days following
billing of same by the City.
17. This Environmental and Design Review Permit shall run with the land and shall remain valid
regardless of any change of ownership of the project site, subject to these conditions. This
Environmental and Design Review Permit will fully vest once a building/grading permit is
issued and ‘substantial construction’ is commenced or a time extension request is submitted
to the City’s Community Development Department, Planning Division, within two (2) years
of original approval, or Enter Council Date (‘Substantial construction’ is defined
as the pouring of all required foundations and the installation of vertical components, such
as exterior walls). Failure to obtain a grading/building permit and commence ‘substantial
construction, or failure to obtain a time extension within the two-year period, will result in the
expiration of this Environmental and Design Review Permit.
18. This Environmental and Design Review Permit shall run concurrently with the Use Permit
(UP16-018) approval. If the Environmental and Design Review Permit expires, the Use
Permit approval shall also expire and become invalid.
Prior to Issuance of Demolition Permits
Community Development Department, Planning Division
19. Prior to issuance of a demolition permit, the project sponsor shall submit verification that the
requirements of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) have been met
and necessary permits have been issued for demolition of the existing buildings.
20. Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, the applicant shall submit written verification
from a pest control consultant indicating that the project site has been serviced to eliminate
rodents.
21. Prior to issuance, the conditions listed in condition of approval #107 shall be noted on the
demolition plan.
Community Development Department – Building Division
22. Any demolition of existing structures will require a permit. Submittal shall include three (3)
copies of the site plan, asbestos certification and PG&E disconnect notices. Also,
Exhibit 2
File Nos. UP18-008, ED18-018, & LLA18-001 14
application must be made to the Bay Area Air Quality Management District prior to obtaining
the permit and beginning work.
Public Works Department - Traffic Engineering Division
23. Prior to demolition permit, the applicant shall submit a detailed traffic control plan for review
and approval of the traffic division. All traffic from any off -haul of demolition materials shall
be conducted outside of the A.M. or P.M. peak hours (after 9:00 A.M and before 4:00 P.M.).
24. All construction staging shall occur on-site or another site with appropriate approvals from
property owner. No staging shall occur on City right-of-way without review and approval of
the Public Works Department.
25. A plan for the demolition shall be submitted for review and approval of the City Traffic
Engineer. This plan shall indicate the haul/truck routes, size of trucks to be used for hauling
off-haul and the frequency/times of any off-haul.
Prior to Issuance of Grading/Building Permits
Community Development Department, Planning Division
26. Due to the close proximity of the project site to San Rafael Creek, a qualified archaeologist
shall conduct archival and field study to identify the presence of archaeological resources,
including a good faith effort to identify archaeological deposits that may show no indications
on the surface. Field study may include, but is not limited to, hand auger sampling, shovel
test units, or geoarchaeological analysis, as well as other common methods used to identify
the presence of buried archeological resources. A list of qualified archaeologists, who meet
the Secretary of Interior’s Standards, may be found at http://www.chrisinfo.org. If
archaeological resources are discovered, protocols dictated by Conditions #12 and #13
(ED18-018) shall be followed.
27. To reduce potential exterior noise impacts in common outdoor areas within the project to
meet the City’s 65 dBA noise limit, the roof deck shall include a six-foot (6’)-high solid
parapet wall.
28. To reduce measured traffic and predicted train noise levels in habitable residential rooms to
meet the City’s interior noise limits, all exterior window and balcony door shall meet STC
rating of STC 36 or higher. Corner units may require exterior windows and doors with higher
ratings. Some exterior walls may require additional layers of gypsum board.
a. Prior to building permit issuance, a follow-up acoustical study is required to be
submitted to the Community Development Department, Planning Division, with final
recommendations on window, balcony door, and exterior wall STC rating
requirements. This acoustical study shall also review any alternate means of
achieving outdoor air and confirm that any mechanical ventilation system will not
compromise the noise reduction provided by the window, balcony door and wall
assembly.
29. To reduce potential temporary construction and grading noise impacts on the project site to
meet the City’s 90 dBA noise limit, the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the
Community Development Department, Planning Division, that the project complies with the
following:
Exhibit 2
File Nos. UP18-008, ED18-018, & LLA18-001 15
A. Construction contracts specify that all construction and grading equipment, fixed or
mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers and other
State-required noise attenuation devices.
B. Property owners and occupants located within 250 feet of the project boundary shall
be sent a notice, at least 15-days prior to commencement of construction or grading
of each phase, regarding the construction or grading schedule of the project. A sign,
legible at a distance of 50 feet (50’) shall also be posted at the project site. All
notices and signs shall be reviewed and approved the Community Development
Director (or designee), prior to mailing or posting and shall indicate the dates and
duration of construction or grading activities, as well as provide a contact name and
a telephone number where residents and business owners can inquire about the
construction or grading process and register complaints.
C. The General Contractor shall provide evidence that a construction staff member
would be designated as a Noise Disturbance Coordinator and would be present on-
site during construction or grading activities. The Noise Disturbance Coordinator
shall be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction or
grading noise. When a complaint is received, the Noise Disturbance Coordinator
shall notify the Community Development Department, Planning Division, within 24-
hours of the compliant and determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting
too early, bad muffler, etc.) and shall implement reasonable measures to resolve the
complaint, as deemed acceptable by the Community Development Director (or
designee). All notices that are sent to residential units and business owners
immediately surrounding the project site and all signed posted at the project site
shall include the contact name and telephone number for the Noise Disturbance
Coordinator.
D. The applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Community Development
Director (or designee) that construction and grading noise reduction methods shall
be used where feasible. These reduction methods include shutting-off idling
equipment, installing temporary acoustic barriers around stationary construction and
grading noise sources, maximizing the distance between construction and grading
staging areas and occupied residential and commercial areas, and electric air
compressors and similar power tools.
E. Construction and excavation/grading off-haul truck routes shall be designed to avoid
noise sensitive uses (e.g., residences, assisted senior living facilities, hospitals, etc.)
to the greatest extent feasible.
F. During construction and grading, stationary equipment shall be placed such that
emitted noise is directed away from sensitive noise receivers.
30. All communal refuse and recycling facilities shall be full-screened from public view. The
applicant shall obtain and submit a letter from Marin Sanitary Service approving the location
and sizing of these facilities with the building permit plans.
31. The project sponsor shall inform the contractor, general contractor or site supervisor of
these requirements and shall be responsible for informing subcontractors of these
requirements and for implementing these measures on the site.
Exhibit 2
File Nos. UP18-008, ED18-018, & LLA18-001 16
32. Any outstanding Planning Division application processing fees shall be paid prior to grading
or building permit issuance.
33. All mechanical equipment (i.e., air conditioning units, meters and transformers) and
appurtenances not entirely enclosed within the building shall be fully-screened from public
view. The method used to accomplish the screening shall be indicated on the building plans
and approved by the Planning Division.
34. An acoustical test report of all sound-rated windows and doors, by a qualified (licensed)
acoustical consultant, shall be submitted to Planning, ensuring that the selected windows
and doors would reduce the interior noise levels to normally acceptable level adopted by the
City (i.e., 40 dBA in bedrooms and 45 dBA in all other rooms).
35. A Construction Management Plan (CMP) shall be prepared and submitted to the
Community Development Department, Planning Division, for review and approval. The CMP
shall include
a. Projected schedule of work,
b. Projected daily construction truck trips,
c. Proposed construction truck route, location of material staging areas,
d. Location of construction trailers, location of construction worker parking,
e. Designated contact information for contractor and property owner to be posted on
site in case of noise or other construction-related activities.
f. Statement that the project shall conform to the City’s Noise Ordinance (Chapter 8.13
of the San Rafael Municipal Code),
g. Statement that no construction truck traffic shall encroach into any of the
surrounding residential neighborhood streets at any time, and
h. Statement that the existing roadway conditions on Third St., Tamalpais Ave. and
Lincoln Ave. shall be memorialized on digital recording format prior to the start of
construction and that the project sponsor shall be required to repair any roadway
damage created by the additional construction truck traffic.
i. In the event that the CMP is conflicting with any conditions imposed by the grading
permit for the project, the more restrictive language or conditions shall prevail.
36. The project shall mitigate potential air quality impacts associated with construction and
grading activities by preparing and submitting a Dust Control Plan to the City of San Rafael
Community Development Department for review and approval. This Dust Control Plan shall
implement BAAQMD (Bay Area Air Quality Management District) established standard
measures (Basic Construction Mitigation Measures) for reducing fugitive dust emissions,
including but not limited to:
• All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas soil piles, graded areas and
unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day.
• All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be
covered.
• All visible mud or dirt tracked-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using
wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power
sweeping is prohibited.
• All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph.
• All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as
possible.
Exhibit 2
File Nos. UP18-008, ED18-018, & LLA18-001 17
• Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil
binders are used.
• Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or
reducing the maximum idling time to five (5) minutes (as required by the California
airborne toxics control measure; Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of
Regulations (CCR)). Clear signage shall be provided for grading and construction
workers at all access points.
• All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance
with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked be a certified
mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation.
37. The Project sponsor shall inform the contractor, general contractor or site supervisor of
these requirements and shall be responsible for informing subcontractors of these
requirements and for implementing these measures on the site.
38. A dust control / noise control coordinator shall be designated for the Project.
a. A publicly visible sign shall be posted on the site with the telephone number and the
name of person regarding dust or construction complaints. This person shall be the
applicant or contractor team and shall have the authority to take corrective action.
The coordinator shall respond to any complaints and take corrective action within 48
hours of receipt. The BAAQMD phone number and City of San Rafael phone
numbers shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.
b. Prior to issuance of the building permit, the form, design and content of the sign
shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division.
39. The project shall comply with the City’s inclusionary or affordable housing requirement
(currently Section 14.16.030 of the SRMC) plus the additional affordable housing required
by the City to grant the applicant’s request for both a height bonus and a density bonus
beyond provisions provided by the State Density Bonus law:
a. The project is required to provide nine (9) below-market-rate or BMR units
composed of five (5) BMR units at the very low-income household level and four (4)
BMR units at the low-income household level) to comply with the City’s inclusionary
or affordable housing requirement; plus
b. As offered by the applicant, the project shall provide an additional three (3) BMR
‘studio’ units at the moderate-income household level for a period ten (10) years.
c. The project sponsor is required to enter into a BMR (below-market-rate) agreement
with Marin Housing Authority, deed-restricting the income level for occupancy of the
affordable units and obtain City Council approval of the BMR agreements. The
configuration of the BMR units shall reflect the generally configuration of the total
units approved by the project, with the exception of the three (3) BMR units at the
moderate-income household level which will be ‘studio’ units. These BMR units shall
be spread out evenly throughout the floors of the new building. The specific location
of these BMR units may ‘float’ though they shall not be ‘bunched’ together. These
BMR units shall be comparable in size, finishes and unit mixture to the market rate
units.
Exhibit 2
File Nos. UP18-008, ED18-018, & LLA18-001 18
Department of Public Works
40. A grading permit is required for the project from the Department of Public Works (111
Morphew St.). The grading permit submittal shall include a site-specific erosion and
sediment control plan
41. The project sponsor shall obtain an encroachment permit for any work within the Right-of-
Way (ROW) from the Department of Public Works. Access to the adjacent properties shall
be maintained throughout construction unless alternative arrangements are made.
42. All exterior doors shall not swing into the public Right-of-Way (ROW), pursuant to CBC
3202.2).
43. Given the scope of the project and available staff time, third party inspection may be
required on behalf of the City. If determined necessary by the Department of Public Wo rks,
a deposit may be required to fund inspection activity, including but not limited to grading,
traffic, drainage, and access.
44. Frontage improvements shall include new sidewalk, curb and gutter. Any reduction in the
frontage improvements shall be determined by the Department of Public Works at the time
of issuance of a building permit, or as approved based on field observations during
construction. Repaving extents of the adjacent roadways shall be determined at the time of
encroachment permit application. For moratorium streets full width resurfacing shall be
required.
A conduit shall be provided along the frontage, to serve future City communication system
upgrades, such as signal interconnection.
45. This site is located within Special Flood Hazard Area Zone AH with a Base Flood Elevation
(BFE) of 11.0 feet. Improvements shall meet FEMA’s flood damage resistant materials
guidelines as provided in Technical Bulletin 2. The areas located below the base flood
elevation shall be designed to resist hydrodynamic forces and include protection for
mechanical and electrical systems as required in Technical Bulletin 7. More information is
available on FEMA’s website, with Technical Bulletins listed at:
https://www.fema.gov/media-library/collections/4.
46. This project includes more than 5,000 square feet of total impervious area replacement and
creation and is a regulated project. Provide a stormwater control plan in compliance with
MCSTOPPP requirements. This is a short-written document to accompany the plan set. A
stormwater facilities maintenance agreement is also required. More information is available
from MCSTOPPP, hosted on the Marin County Website. See tools and guidance, and post
construction requirements at:
http://www.marincounty.org/depts/pw/divisions/mcstoppp/development/new-and-
redevelopment-projects.
47. Prior to building permit issuance, additional information on the maintenance of the proposed
stormwater bioretention treatment facilities as well as a stormwater facility maintenance
agreement shall be required.
48. A construction vehicle impact fee shall be required at the time of building permit issuance;
which is calculated at 1% of the valuation, with the first $10,000 of valuation exempt.
Exhibit 2
File Nos. UP18-008, ED18-018, & LLA18-001 19
49. The project shall pay a traffic mitigation fees (currently $250,514, based on 59 net new peak
hour (33 a.m. and 26 p.m.) traffic trips (59 x $4,246), to be determined at the time of
building permit issuance. The final fee shall include a reduction based on the number of
peak hour trips resulting from the 12 affordable or BMR units required by the project.
Additional traffic control enhancements may be required in and around the project site, as
discussed in the revised traffic study (Fehr and Peers, dated January 14, 2019) for the
project.
San Rafael Sanitation District (SRSD)
50. Prior to building permit issuance, sewer connection fees are required for the proposed new
residential units (currently $1,159,152.00, based on 120 units at $9,659.60 per unit).
51. New sewer connection fees are required for the commercial space as well, if plumbing
fixtures are proposed. These fees have not been calculated by SRSD.
52. Credit for existing plumbing fixtures has not been calculated. In order to receive credit for
these fixtures in the existing buildings proposed for demolition, the project sponsor shall
submit plans to SRSD which include a full inventory of the existing facilities accompanied by
photos.
53. Provide calculations to SRSD on the potential wastewater flow that will be generated daily
from the proposed 120 residential units and any commercial space.
54. Reference Civil Drawing Sh. C.5:
a. A backflow prevention device is required for the project.
b. The sewer lateral shall be connected to the sewer mainline using a wye connection
and shear band couplings.
c. Drainage to the trench drains shall be limited to the water flow from within the
enclosed garage area. No stormwater runoff from the sidewalk or any area outside
the garage shall drain to the trench drains that connect to the sanitary sewer system.
Community Development Department, Building Division
55. School fees will be required for the project to be paid to the School district, prior to issuance
of a building permit. Calculations for the fee are done by San Rafael City Schools, and
those fees (currently computed at $3.79 per square foot of new living area and $0.61 per
square foot of new non-living building area) are paid directly to them (currently 310 Nova
Albion Way, San Rafael, CA 94903). Proof of payment shall be submitted to the Building
Division prior to issuance of the building permit.
56. Prior to any use or occupancy of this building or structure or any portion there of a
“Certificate of Occupancy” must be issued by the Chief Building Official pursuant to
California Building Code Section 111.1. Failure to secure a “Certificate of Occupancy” is a
violation and will result in a $500 citation per day that the violation continues.
57. The design and construction of all site alterations shall comply with the current editions of
the California Building Code, Plumbing Code, Electrical Code, California Mechanical Code,
California Fire Code, California Energy Code, Title 24 California Energy Efficiency
Standards, California Green Building Standards Code and City of San Rafael Ordinances
and Amendments.
Exhibit 2
File Nos. UP18-008, ED18-018, & LLA18-001 20
58. A building permit is required for the proposed work. Applications shall be accompanied by
four (4) complete sets of construction drawings to include:
a) Architectural plans
b) Structural plans
c) Electrical plans
d) Plumbing plans
e) Mechanical plans
f) Site/civil plans (clearly identifying grade plan and height of the building)
g) Structural Calculations
h) Truss Calculations
i) Soils reports
j) Green Building documentation
k) Title-24 energy documentation
59. Based on the distance to the property line (and/or adjacent buildings on the same parcel),
the building elements shall have a fire resistive rating not less than that specified in CBC
Table 601 and exterior walls shall have a fire resistive rating not less than that specified in
CBC Table 602.
60. Cornices, eaves overhangs, exterior balconies and similar projections extending beyond the
floor area shall conform to the requirements of CBC 705.2. Projections shall not extend
beyond the distance determined by the following two methods, whichever results in the
lesser projection:
a) A point one-third the distance from the exterior face of the wall to the lot line where
protected openings or a combination of protected openings and unprotected
openings are required in the exterior wall.
b) A point one-half the distance from the exterior face of the wall to the lot line where all
openings in the exterior wall are permitted to be unprotected or the building is
equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system.
c) More than 12 inches into areas where openings are prohibited.
61. The occupancy classification, construction type and square footage of the new building shall
be specified on the plans in addition to justification calculations for the allowable area of
each building. Site/civil plans prepared by a California licensed surveyor or engineer clearly
showing topography, identifying grade plane and height of the building.
62. The new buildings contain several different occupancy types. Individual occupancies are
categorized with different levels of hazard and may need to be separated from other
occupancy types for safety reasons. Under mixed-occupancy conditions the project
architect has available several design methodologies (accessory occupancies, non-
separated occupancies, and separated occupancies) to address the mixed-occupancy
concerns.
63. Buildings located four (4) or more stories above grade plane shall provide one stairwell
extending to the roof, unless the roof slope exceeds an angle of 4 vertical to 12 horizontal
CBC 1009.13.
64. The maximum area of unprotected and protected openings permitted in the exterior wall in
any story of a building shall not exceed the percentages specified in CBC Table 705.8
“Maximum Area of Exterior Wall Openings Based on Fire Separation Distance and Degree
of Opening Protection.” To calculate the maximum area of exterior wall openings you must
Exhibit 2
File Nos. UP18-008, ED18-018, & LLA18-001 21
provide the building setback distance from the property lines and then justify the percentage
of proposed wall openings and include whether the opening is unprotected or protected:
• 15% exterior wall openings (in any story) in sprinklered buildings where the openings
are 3’ to less than 5’ from the property line or buildings on the same property.
• 25% exterior wall openings (in any story) in sprinklered buildings where the openings
are 5’ to less than 10’ from the property line or buildings on the same property.
• 45% exterior wall openings (in any story) in sprinklered buildings where the openings
are 10’ to less than 15’ from the property line or buildings on the same property
65. The new building shall have address identification placed in a position that is plainly legible
and visible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers painted on the curb do not
satisfy this requirement. For new buildings, the address shall be internally-illuminated or
externally-illuminated and remain illuminated at all hours of darkness. Number shall be a
minimum 6 inches in height with ½ inch stroke for commercial applications. The address
shall be contrasting in color to their background (SMC 12.12.20).
66. Bollards must be placed in the garage to protect mechanical equipment from vehicular
damage when located in the path of a vehicle (if applicable).
67. Any demolition of existing structures shall require a permit. Demolition permit submittal shall
include three (3) copies of the site plan, asbestos certification and PG&E disconnect notice.
All required permits from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District shall be obt ained
and documentation provided prior to building permit issuance and any work commencing.
68. A grading permit is required for any grading or site remediation, soils export, import and
placement. Provide a detailed soils report prepared by a qualified engineer to address these
procedures. In particular, the report should address the import and placement and
compaction of soils at future building pad locations and should be based on an assumed
foundation design. This information should be provided to Building Division and Department
of Public Works for review and comments prior to any such activities taking place.
69. Prior to building permit issuance for the construction of the new building, geotechnical and
civil pad certifications are to be submitted. Building pad locations will have to be surveyed
and marked prior to placement of foundations.
70. In the parking garage, mechanical ventilation will be required capable of exhausting a
minimum of .75 cubic feet per minute per square foot of gross floor area pursuant to CMC
Table 4-4.
71. In the parking garage, in areas where motor vehicles are stored, floor surfaces shall be of
noncombustible, nonabsorbent materials. Floors shall drain to an approved oil separator or
trap discharging to sewers in accordance with the Plumbing Code and SWIPP.
72. The parking garage ceiling height shall have a minimum vertical clearance of 8’ 2” where
required for accessible parking.
73. Any public area within the new building shall be provided with sanitary facilities per CPC Sec
412 and Table 4-1 (including provisions for persons with disabilities). Separate facilities may
be required for each sex depending on use.
Exhibit 2
File Nos. UP18-008, ED18-018, & LLA18-001 22
74. In accordance with California Plumbing Code section 422, in business and mercantile with a
total occupant load of 50 or less including customers and employees, one toilet facility
designed for use by no more than one person at a time, shall be permitted for use by both
sexes.
75. Facilities in mercantile and business occupancies, toilet facility requirements for customers
and employees shall be permitted to be met with a single set of restrooms accessible to
both groups. The required number of fixtures shall be the greater of the required number for
employees or the required number for customers. Fixtures for customer use shall be
permitted to be met by providing a centrally located toilet facility within a max distance not to
exceed 500 feet. In stores with a floor area of 150 square feet or less the requirement to
provide facilities for employees shall be permitted to be met by providing a centrally located
toilet facility within a max distance not to exceed 300 feet.
76. Minimum elevator car size (interior dimension) 60” wide by 30” deep with an entrance
opening of at least 60” or a car size of 42” wide by 48” deep with an entrance opening of 36”
or a car size of 60” wide by 36” deep with an entrance opening of at least 36”.
77. All buildings with four (4) or more floors and one or more elevators shall provide not less
than one medical emergency service elevator. The medical emergency service elevator
shall accommodate the loading and transport of an ambulance gurney or stretcher. The
elevator car size shall have a minimum clear distance between walls ad door excluding
return panels not less than 80” x 54” and a minimum distance from wall to return panel not
less than 51” with a 42” side slide door.
78. In the service areas, mechanical ventilation will be required capable of exhausting a
minimum of 1.5 cubic feet per minute per square foot of gross floor area. Connecting
offices, waiting rooms, restrooms, and retail areas shall be supplied with conditioned air
under positive pressure.
79. The project shall be designed to provide access to the physically disabled in accordance
with requirements of Title-24, California Code of Regulation. For existing buildings and
facilities when alterations, structural repairs or additions are made, accessibility
improvements for persons with disabilities may be required. Improvements shall be made,
but are not limited to, the following accessible features:
a) Path of travel from public transportation point of arrival
b) Routes of travel between buildings
c) Accessible parking
d) Ramps
e) All public entrances
f) Sanitary facilities (restrooms)
g) Drinking fountains & Public telephones (when provided)
h) Accessible features per specific occupancy requirements
i) Accessible special features, (i.e., ATM's point of sale machines, etc.)
80. The site development of items such as common sidewalks, parking areas, stairs, ramps,
common facilities, etc. are subject to compliance with the accessibility standards contained
in Title-24, California Code of Regulations. Pedestrian access provisions should provide a
minimum 48" wide unobstructed paved surface to and along all accessible routes. Items
such as signs, meter pedestals, light standards, trash receptacles, etc., shall not encroach
on this 4' minimum width. Also, note that sidewalk slopes and side slopes shall not exceed
Exhibit 2
File Nos. UP18-008, ED18-018, & LLA18-001 23
published minimums per California Title 24, Part 2. The civil, grading and landscape plans
shall address these requirements to the extent possible.
81. The parking garages shall have a minimum vertical clearance of 8’ 2” ceiling height where
required for accessible parking.
82. Multistory apartment buildings with three (3) or more residential units or condominium
buildings with four (4) or more residential units shall provide at least 10% of the dwelling
units, but no less than one (1) dwelling unit, which comply with the accessible requirements
per CBC 1102A.3, as follows:
a) The primary entry to the dwelling unit shall be on an accessible route unless
exempted by site impracticality tests in CBC Section 1150A.
b) At least one powder room or bathroom shall be located on the primary entry level,
served by an accessible route.
c) All rooms or spaces located on the primary entry level shall be served by an
accessible route. Rooms and spaces located on the primary entry level and subject
to this chapter may include but are not limited to kitchens, powder rooms,
bathrooms, living rooms, bedrooms or hallways.
83. Minimum shower size in the fully accessible room must be a minimum of 60” wide by 30”.
84. Multifamily dwelling and apartment accessible parking spaces shall be provided at a
minimum rate of 2 percent of the covered multifamily dwelling units. At least one space of
each type of parking facility shall be made accessible even if the total number exceeds 2%.
85. When parking is provided for multifamily dwellings and is not assigned to a resident or a
group of residents, at least 5% of the parking spaces shall be accessible and provide
access to grade-level entrances of multifamily dwellings and facilities (e.g. swimming pools,
club houses, recreation areas and laundry rooms) that serve the dwellings. Accessible
parking spaces shall be located on the shortest accessible route to an accessible building,
or dwelling unit entrance.
86. Public accommodation disabled parking spaces must be provided according the following
table and must be uniformly distributed throughout the site:
Total Number of Parking
Spaces
Provided
Minimum Required Number of
H/C Spaces
1 to 25 1
26 to 50 2
51 to 75 3
76 to 100 4
101 to 150 5
151 to 200 6
201 to 300 7
301 to 400 8
401 to 500 9
501 to 1,000 Two percent of total
1,001 and over Twenty, plus one for each 100
Exhibit 2
File Nos. UP18-008, ED18-018, & LLA18-001 24
or fraction thereof over 1,001
87. At least one (1) disabled parking space shall be van-accessible, 9’ in width plus an 8’-wide
off- load area or 17’-wide overall. Additionally, one in every eight required handicap spaces
shall be van accessible.
88. The proposed residential units shall meet the sound attenuation requirements of CBC
Chapter 12. In particular, the residential units facing Third St., Tamalpais Ave. and Lincoln
Ave. may require special glazing and/or sound attenuation features to compensate for the
adjacent traffic/street noise.
89. This project is subject to the City of San Rafael Green Building Ordinance. A sliding scale is
applied based on the average unit square footage. New multi-family dwellings must comply
with the “Green Building Rating System” by showing a minimum compliance threshold
between 65 and 75 points. Additionally, the energy budget must also be below Title 24
Energy Efficiency Standards a minimum 15%.
San Rafael Fire Department, Fire Prevention Bureau
90. The design and construction of all site alterations shall comply with the current editions of
the California Fire Code and City of San Rafael Ordinances and Amendments.
91. Deferred Submittals for the following fire protection systems shall be submitted to the Fire
Prevention Bureau for approval and permitting prior to installation of the systems:
a) Fire Sprinkler plans (Deferred Submittal to the Fire Prevention Bureau)
b) Fire Standpipe plans (Deferred Submittal to the Fire Prevention Bureau)
c) Private Fire Service Main plans (Deferred Submittal to the Fire Prevention Bureau)
d) Fire Alarm plans (Deferred Submittal to the Fire Prevention Bureau)
92. Show the location of address numbers on the building elevation. The new building shall
have address identification placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the
street or road fronting the property. Please refer to Fire Prevention Bureau Premises
Identification Standards 09-1001, Table 1.
93. As the building is over 30 feet in height, an aerial fire apparatus access roadway is required
parallel to one entire side of the building.
a) The Aerial apparatus access roadway shall be located within a minimum 15 feet and
a maximum of 30 feet from the building.
b) The minimum unobstructed width for an aerial fire apparatus access road is 26’.
c) Overhead utility and power lines shall not be located within the aerial fire apparatus
access roadway, or between the roadway and the building.
94. Aerial fire apparatus access roads shall be designated “fire lanes”; with curbs painted red
and contrasting white lettering stating “No Parking Fire Lane” and signs shall be posted in
accordance CFC Section 503.3.
95. When a building is fully sprinklered, all portions of the exterior building perimeter shall be
located within 250’ of an approved fire apparatus access road.
Exhibit 2
File Nos. UP18-008, ED18-018, & LLA18-001 25
96. Clarify if the fire flow requirements of Appendix B, table B105.1 of the CFC are being met by
the surrounding hydrants, The required hydrants shall be within 400 feet (400’) of all exterior
points of the new building.
97. Provide stairways for fire department roof access pursuant to CFC 504.3.
98. At least one (1) elevator in the new building shall be designated as an accessible means of
egress and will require emergency power. Please show the locations of the emergency
generators. Separate permits will be required to be issued for any above ground fuel
storage tanks pursuant to CBC 1009.2.1.
99. Each building shall provide a least one (1) elevator that will accommodate an ambulance
stretcher pursuant to CBC 3002.4.
100. Hazardous materials placards shall be installed in accordance with NFPA 704.
101. A fire apparatus access plan shall be prepared for this project. Fire apparatus plan shall
show the location the following:
a) Designated fire apparatus access roads.
b) Red curbs and no parking fire lane signs.
c) Onsite fire hydrants.
d) Fire Department Connection (FDC).
e) Double detector check valve.
f) Street address sign.
g) Recessed Knox Box
h) Fire Alarm annunciator panel.
i) Provide a note on the plans as follows: “The designated fire apparatus access roads
and fire hydrant shall be installed and approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau prior
construction of the building”.
102. A Knox Box is required at the primary point of first response to the new building. A
recessed mounted Knox Box # 3275 Series is required for this project; the Knox Box shall
be clearly visible upon approach to the main entrance from the fire lane. Note the Knox Box
must be installed from 72” to 78” above finish grade; show the location on the plans.
103. The mechanical parking system shall comply with the following requirements:
a) The automatic fire sprinkler system shall be designed with the appropriate coverage
density.
b) The mechanical parking system shall allow for fire department access.
c) The mechanical parking system shall allow for appropriate heat and smoke removal.
d) The mechanical parking system shall provide fire department manual shutoff and
operation (similar to elevator recall).
104. Mechanical, electrical and fire sprinkler riser rooms shall be identified pursuant to CFC
Section 509 (4-inch lettering, ½-inch stroke in a color that contrasts to background).
105. Contact the Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD) to make arrangements for MMWD to
provide adequate water supply service for the required fire protection system.
Exhibit 2
File Nos. UP18-008, ED18-018, & LLA18-001 26
During Construction
Community Development Department, Planning Division
106. Applicant/contractor shall comply with all conditions of approval related to Construction
Management Plan, and other conditions related to construction impacts.
107. The following measures shall be implemented during the demolition process:
a. Watering shall be used to control dust generation during demolition of structures and
breakup of pavement.
b. All trucks hauling debris from the site shall be covered
c. Dust-proof chutes shall be used to load debris into trucks whenever feasible.
d. A dust control coordinator shall be designated for the project. The name, address
and telephone number of the dust coordinator shall be prominently posted on-site
and shall be kept on file at the Planning Division. The coordinator shall respond
regarding dust complaints promptly (within 24 hours) and shall have the authority to
take corrective action.
Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD)
108. District records indicate that the property’s current annual water entitlement is insufficient to
meet the water demand for the project and the purchase of additional water entitlement will
be required. Additional water entitlement will be available upon request and fulfillment of the
following requirements:
a) Complete a High-Pressure Water Service Application.
b) Submit a copy of the building permit.
c) Pay the appropriate fees and charges.
d) Comply with the District’s rules and regulations in effect at the time service is
requested, including the installation of a meter per structure per use.
e) Comply with all indoor and outdoor requirements of District Code Title 13 – Water
Conservation. Indoor plumbing fixtures shall meet specific efficiency requirements.
Landscape, irrigation, grading and fixture plans shall be submitted to the District for
review and approval. Any questions regarding District Code Title 13 – Water
Conservation should be directed to the District’s Water Conservation Department at
(415) 945-1497. You may also find information on the District’s water conservation
requirements online at www.marinwater.org.
f) Comply with the backflow prevention requirements, if upon the Districts review
backflow protection is warranted, including installation, testing and maintenance.
Questions regarding backflow requirements should be directed to the Backflow
Prevention Program Coordinator at (415) 945-1558.
g) Use of recycled water is required, where available, for all approved uses, including
irrigation and the flushing of toilets and urinals. Questions regarding the use of
recycled water should be directed to Dewey Sorensen at (415) 945-1558.
h) Installation of gray water recycling systems is required when practicable.
Pacific Gas & Electric
109. Electric and gas service to the project site will be provided in accordance with the applicable
extension rules, which are available on PG&E’s website at
http://www.pge.com/myhome/customerservice/other/newconstruction or contact (800) PGE-
5000. It is highly recommended that PG&E be contacted as soon as possible so that there
is adequate time to engineer all required improvements and to schedule any site work.
Exhibit 2
File Nos. UP18-008, ED18-018, & LLA18-001 27
110. The cost of relocating any existing PG&E facilities or conversion of existing overhead
facilities to underground shall be the sole responsibility of the applicant or property owner.
111. Prior to the start excavation or construction, the general contractor shall call Underground
Service Alert (USA) at (800) 227-2600 to have the location of any existing underground
facilities marked in the field.
Prior to Occupancy
Community Development Department, Planning Division
112. Prior to occupancy of any of the units, a post-construction report from an acoustical
engineer shall be submitted to the Planning Division verifying that the multifamily residential
units comply with the interior noise standard as prescribed by State Administrative Code
standards, Title 25, Part 2.
113. Prior to occupancy of any of the units, a post-construction report from a lighting engineer
shall be submitted to the Planning Division verifying that the lighting levels of the project
comply with the City’s recommended lighting levels (see SRMC Section 14.16.227).
114. Prior to occupancy, the project Geotechnical Engineer shall submit a letter to the City
identifying that the project Geotechnical Engineer inspected the project during the
construction and the project complied with their recommendations and that all
recommendations were property incorporated during construction of the project
115. Final inspection of the project by the Community Development Department, Planning
Division, is required. The applicant shall contact the Planning Division to request a final
inspection upon completion of the project. The final inspection shall require a minimum of
48-hour advance notice.
116. The landscape architect for the project shall submit a letter to the Planning Division,
confirming the landscaping has been installed in compliance with the approved project plans
and the irrigation is fully functioning.
After Occupancy
Community Development Department, Planning Division
117. Following the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, all new exterior lighting shall be
subject to a 90-day lighting level review period by the City to ensure that all lighting sources
provide safety for the building occupants while not creating a glare or hazard on adjacent
streets or be annoying to adjacent residents. During this lighting review period, the City may
require adjustments in the direction or intensity of the lighting, if necessary. All exterior
lighting shall include a master photoelectric cell with an automatic timer system, where the
intensity of illumination shall be turned off during daylight.
Exhibit 2
File Nos. UP18-008, ED18-018, & LLA18-001 28
Lot Line Consolidation (LLA18-001)
Conditions of Approval
Prior to Issuance of Grading/Building Permits
Community Development Department, Planning Division
1. The applicant shall submit five (5) copies of the plat map showing the existing and proposed
lot lines, the location of any existing structures, easements, prominent trees and access to
all public streets, and a copy of Grant Deed, prepared for the lot line consolidation, for
review by the City Engineer and approval, prior to recordation with the County of Marin
Recorder’s Office.
The foregoing Resolution was adopted at the regular City of San Rafael Planning Commission
meeting held on the 27th day of August 2019.
Moved by Commissioner_____and seconded by Commissioner .
AYES: Commissioners:
NOES: Commissioners:
ABSENT: Commissioners:
ABSTAIN: Commissioners:
SAN RAFAEL PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST: BY:
Paul A. Jensen, Secretary Sarah Loughran, Chair
Exhibit 3
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table
Exhibit: 3-1
LAND USE ELEMENT
LU-2. Development Timing. For health, safety and
general welfare reasons, new development should only
occur when adequate infrastructure is available consistent
with the following findings:
a. Project-related traffic will not cause the level of
service established in the Circulation Element to be
exceeded;
b. Any circulation improvements needed to maintain the
level of service standard established in the Circulation
Element have been programmed and funding has been
committed;
c. Environmental review of needed circulation
improvement projects has been completed;
d. The time frame for completion of the needed
circulation improvements will not cause the level of
service in the Circulation Element to be exceeded, or
the findings set forth in Policy C-5 have been made;
and
e. Sewer, water, and other infrastructure improvements
will be available to serve new development by the
time the development is constructed
Consistent
The project proposes to redevelop two adjacent in-fill parcels, currently served by City infrastructure and
services. The smaller parcel (703 Third St.) is located at the southwest corner of Third St. and Tamalpais
Ave. while the larger parcel (723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave.) is located at the southeast corner of Third
St. and Lincoln Ave. Both parcels are located with Second/Third St. Mixed -Use East (2/3 MUE) District
zone, a Downtown commercial zoning district. The project proposes to demolish approximately 15,000 sq.
ft. of combined commercial space within two, 1-2-story buildings and a surface parking lot and construct a
new, six-story, 73-tall mixed-use building with 120 apartment units above 121 garage parking spaces, of
which 109 parking spaces will be provided by mechanical parking lifts. The project proposes a total of 12
affordable (‘below-market-rate or BMR) units, including nine (9) required BMR units (5 units at the very
low-income level and 4 units at the low-income level) and three (3) additional voluntary BMR units in the
moderate-income level for a 10-year term.
The City’s Traffic Engineer has reviewed the project and evaluated its traffic impacts against the City’s
level of service standards. A Transportation Impact Analysis report (Fehr & Peers Transportation
Consultants, revision dated January 14, 2019) originally submitted for the project was revised to expand
the study area and to modify the methodology used in the analysis. The results of the updated trip
generation indicate that, based on traffic counts of existing land use trips, and with deductions applied f or
‘walk, bike and transit’ trips due to the site’s proximity to the Downtown, the SMART station and the
transit center, the project would result in 33 net new AM peak hour trips (7 - 9am weekdays) and 26 PM net
new peak hour trips (4-6pm weekdays). The Transportation Impact Analysis report indicates surrounding
intersections and arterials would continue to operate (existing plus project volumes) acceptably per the
City’s LOS (Level of Service) standards in the General Plan. The results of the Transportation Impact
Analysis report have been confirmed by the City’s Traffic Engineer. Staff finds the proposed density (120
units) would result in negligible traffic impacts which are off-set by the payment of traffic mitigation fees
on the 59 new peak hour trips anticipated to result from the project, which would be a condition of
approval. The payment of traffic mitigation fees would be a condition of approval and are intended to help
fund the project’s fair share of local circulation improvement projects by the Ci ty. Lastly, the quasi-
governmental agencies that would provide water and sewer service to the site have reviewed the proposed
project and determined that there is adequate capacity to service the new projec t.
LU-8. Density of Residential Development.
Residential densities are shown in Exhibit 11, Land Use
Consistent with conditions
See LU-2 discussion above. Both parcels within the project site are assigned a General Plan land use
Exhibit 3
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table
Exhibit: 3-2
Categories, pages 38-40. Maximum densities are not
guaranteed but minimum densities are generally required.
Density of residential development on any site shall
respond to the following factors: site resources and
constraints, potentially hazardous conditions, traffic and
access, adequacy of infrastructure, City design policies and
development patterns and prevailing densities of adjacent
developed areas.
designation of Second/Third St. Mixed-Use (2/3 MU). The 2/3MU land use designation allows residential
uses as part of mixed-use development at densities between 32 and 62 per gross acre. Based on this
allowable density, the 27,367 sq. ft. project site would be allowed 20 to 39 residential units. The Zoning
designation for the project site is Second/Third St. Mixed-Use East (2/3 MUE) District, which allows a
base residential density of one (1) unit per 600 sq. ft. of lot area or 45 units. By complying with the City’s
inclusionary housing requirement (20% of the maximum base density or 9 affordable or BMR units), the
project is eligible to request a State Density Bonus of up to 35%, or 16 additional market-rate units, and a
maximum of two (2) concessions/incentives. Therefore, by meeting the City affordable housing
requirement, the project is allowed a maximum density of 61 units. As noted above, the project has
requested a 75-unit density bonus above the base density, for a total of 120 units, which translates to a
proposed 162% density bonus. This additional density bonus is one of the two concessions/incentives
requested by the project (additional building height is the other concession/incentive requested by the
project) and requires the submittal of a financial pro forma which demonstrates that the proposed 120 units
are needed to make the project financially feasible to develop. The City has hired an independent 3 rd party
economist, Seifel Associates, to review the financial pro forma and assess whether the number of units
requested are necessary to make the project financially feasible . After reviewing the financial pro forma,
the City’s consulting economist has determined the project does need the proposed 162% density bonus,
or 120 units, in order for the project to be able to be financially feasible. A maximum 61-unit project (45-
unit base density plus a 35% density bonus or 16 additional units) would not be feasible under current
development conditions. The City is not required to grant a density bonus of more than 35%, but it may
under State law for projects that provided more affordability than the 20% required. For the project, the
applicant has proposed additional density than the minimum required to obtain a 35% density bonus. At
the request of the Planning Commission to provide more affordability to off-set the proposed additional
density, the project has voluntarily increased the proposed affordability, from nine (9 ) BMR units (5 units
at very low-income household levels and 4 units at low-income household levels) to 12 BMR units (5 units
at very low-income household levels and 4 units at low-income household levels plus 3 BMR units at the
moderate-income household levels for a fixed 10-year term) Additionally, there are other considerations
when evaluating the proposed density, including:
• The 2/3 MUE District zoning for the site not only allows for residential density but also allows for
non -residential (commercial) intensity of up to a 1.5 FAR (Floor Area Ratio). For the project site,
the 1.5 FAR would allow up to 41,051 sq. ft, which would translate to approximately two entire
floors worth of additional commercial development;
• Although residential density is not regulated by square footage, the proposed project proposes 120
units in approximately 81,442 sq. ft of building area dedicated to residential use, which translates
to an average of 678 sq. ft/unit. The same size building could be proposed at the maximum base
density of 45 units, but average 1,809 sq. ft/unit, for instance, or the 35% density bonus of 61
units and average 1,313 sq. ft/unit, for instance. Given the need for housing in San Rafael as well
Exhibit 3
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table
Exhibit: 3-3
as throughout the State, staff would assert that a greater number of smaller units would be more
beneficial to the community. This is an opportunity site, close to transit, in the heart of downtown
and is possibly the most appropriate location for higher density; and
• The project provides excess parking than that required by the State for projects in close proximity
to transit. The project is required to provide 88 spaces though proposes to provide 121 total spaces
(composed of 109 resident parking + 12 ADA, ride share, drop off and EV parking spaces .
LU-9. Intensity of Nonresidential Development.
Commercial and industrial areas have been assigned floor
area ratios (FARs) to identify appropriate intensities (see
Exhibits 4, 5 and 6). Maximum allowable FARs are not
guaranteed, particularly in environmentally sensitive areas.
Intensity of commercial and industrial development on any
site shall respond to the following factors: site resources
and constraints, traffic and access, potentially hazardous
conditions, adequacy of infrastructure, and City design
policies.
Consistent
According to Exhibit 6 (Floor Area Ratios in Downtown Environs) of the General Plan, the maximum
nonresidential development allowable on the project site is 1.5 FAR (floor area ratio) or 41,505.5 sq. ft.
based on 27,367 sq. ft. of combined lot area. The project proposes 969 sq. ft. of ground level nonresidential
development or commercial space on the project site.
LU-12. Building Heights. Citywide height limits in San
Rafael are described in Exhibits 7 and 8. For Downtown
height limits see Exhibit 9.
Consistent with conditions
According to Exhibit 9 (Building Heights Limits in Downtown San Rafael) and Exhibit 10 (Height
Bonuses) of the General Plan, the maximum height limit for the project site is 54 ft. plus a 12 ft height
bonus by meeting the affordable housing requirement for a total overall height limit of 66 ft. As designed,
the project proposes a building at 73 ft tall, exceeding the height limit by 7 feet. The height is measured to
the top of the roof deck and the other architectural features on the roof deck (railing, and elevator overruns,
trellises) do not count toward the maximum building height.
During Conceptual Design Review by the Design Review Board (Board) and the Planning Commission in
2017, the project proposed to meet the 66 ft height limit. At that time, the design proposed to bury the
garage level 1 ft below the elevation of the sidewalks. Following Conceptual Review, technical comments
from City Departments and further investigation into the stacked parking lift, the project was increased in
height by 7 feet, from 66 feet to 73 feet, based on the following modifications :
• FEMA requirements require the garage level to be a 1 ft above the existing level. Therefore, a 2 ft
increase of height resulted by placing the ground level at +1 ft above current elevations;
• Further investigation into the mechanical parking lift stacker system preferred by the applicant
resulted in the need for 2.5 ft. of additional height in the garage level, raising the garage plate
height from 18.5 ft to 22 ft. and;
• Plate height for the residential levels were increased from 9 ft to 9.5 ft, resulting in a 2.5 ft net
Exhibit 3
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table
Exhibit: 3-4
change to overall height.
By meeting the affordability requirement, the project is requesting a State density bonus and two (2)
concessions/incentives. One of these concessions is a requested density bonus of 162% and the other is a
height bonus of 7’. Like the density bonus, the requested concession for the height bonus requires
submittal of a financial pro forma demonstrating the concession/incentive is necessary to make the project
financially feasible to develop. As noted above, the City hired a 3rd party economist (Seifel Associates) to
review the financial pro forma , who concluded that the financial pro forma does demonstrate a 120-unit
project is needed to make the project financially feasible .
The project is required to provide 82 on-site parking spaces based on State Density Bonus law that requires
0.5 spaces/bedroom. The project proposes to provide 33 more parking spaces than required (121 provided
vs 82 required) as an amenity and need for the residential units. The amount of proposed parking would
generally equal 1 space per unit. The extra parking necessitates the need to either create two floors of
parking or utilize a stacked parking system. Although it is conceivably possible to dig down and provide
one floor of parking underground, the small size of the lot, FEMA requirements coupled with the high -
water table would make this option nearly impossible. The other option is to only provide one level of
parking without stackers, which would only require a 10 ft floor plate (rather than 22 ft) on the ground
level. However, this option would not only render the project inconsistent with the parking requirements
(only 66 spaces could be provided without use of parking stackers, where 82 are required), but also
insufficient to meet the real-life parking demands of potential tenants in this project.
LU-13. Height Bonuses. A height bonus may be granted
with a use permit for a development that provides one or
more of the amenities listed in Exhibit 10, provided the
building’s design is consistent with Community Design
policies and design guidelines. No more than one height
bonus may be granted for a project.
Consistent
See LU-12 discussion above. By providing the required affordability (9 affordable or BMR units), the
project is eligible for a 12’ height bonus, through a Use Permit, by virtue that the project site is located
within the 2/3 MUE District. This height bonus is allowed by zoning. The project requests an additional 7’
height bonus, as a concession/incentive under the State Density Bonus law. On May 7, 2019, the Board
reviewed the formal project for site and building design and unanimously (4 -0-2 vote; Planning
Commission Liaison Davidson) recommended approval of the site and building design with enhanced
“Gateway Corner” (Third St. and Tamalpais Ave.) façade treatments (unique materials and colors) and the
proposed height bonuses and 73’ building height. The Board evaluated the revised site and building design
for consistency with all applicable design-related General Plan policies and design criteria and guidelines
and determined it to be well-designed.
Exhibit 3
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table
Exhibit: 3-5
LU-14. Land Use Compatibility. Design new
development in mixed residential and commercial areas to
minimize potential nuisance effects and to enhance their
surroundings.
Consistent
See LU-13 discussion above.
LU-18. Lot Consolidation Commercial and higher
density residential parcels less than 6,000 square feet in
size should be encouraged to be combined to provide
adequate parking and circulation, minimize driveway cuts
on busy streets, and maximize development and design
potential.
Consistent
The project proposes to construct a mixed -use building over two (2) adjacent Downtown lots. Prior to
building permit issuance, the project will need to merge or consolidate the lots into one common parcel by
extinguishing the common property line currently separating the lots. A plat map with closure calculations
shall be submitted to Planning for review and approval by the Land Development Engineer in the
Department of Public Works prior to approval by the Community Development Director and recordation
with Marin County by the Land Development Engineer.
LU-23. Land Use Map and Categories. Land use
categories are generalized groupings of land uses and titles
that define a predominant land use type (See Exhibit 11).
All proposed projects must meet density and FAR
standards (See Exhibits 4, 5 and 6) for that type of use, and
other applicable development standards. Some listed uses
are conditional uses in the zoning ordinance and may be
allowed only in limited areas or under limited
circumstances. Maintain a Land Use Map that illustrates
the distribution and location of land uses as en visioned by
General Plan policies. (See Exhibit 11).
Consistent with conditions
See LU-2, LU-8 and LU-12 discussions above.
HOUSING ELEMENT
H-1. Housing Distribution.
Promote the distribution of new and affordable housing of
quality construction throughout the city to meet local
housing needs.
Consistent
See LU-8 discussion above. The project proposes to construct 120 new residential apartment units in the
Downtown, adjacent to the SMART downtown station and in close proximity to the Bettini Transi t Center
(the exact location of which is unknown at this time). Of these new units, the project proposes a total of 12
BMR units, including nine (9) required BMR units (5 BMRs at the very low-income household level and 4
BMRs at the low-income household level) and three (3) additional voluntary BMR units at the moderate-
income household level for a fixed 10-year period. Staff finds the project would help the City meet its
RHNA (Regional Housing Needs Allocation) obligations, specifically housing goals in the very low- and
low-income household levels.
Exhibit 3
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table
Exhibit: 3-6
H-2. Design That Fits into the Neighborhood Context.
Design new housing, remodels and additions to be
compatible in form to the surrounding neighborhood.
Incorporate transitions in height and setbacks from
adjacent properties to respect adjacent development
character and privacy. Respect existing landforms and
minimize effects on adjacent properties.
Consistent
The scale and quality of the existing development located south of the core Downtown (Fourth St.) and
near U.S Highway 101 is changing, primarily due to the ongoing development of the BioMarin campus.
Low profile (1- and 2-story) development is being replaced with much taller (5- and 6-story) buildings.
Determining the predominant design character is a little more difficult. Structures within the adjacent
BioMarin campus are integrated with a cohesive architectural design with coordinated façade treatments.
The project proposes a similar contemporary design though with unique façade treatments (brick with
Corten steel planters at the ground level, stucco at the mid-levels and a mixture of stucco and vertical and
horizontal fiber cement board siding at the upper levels), greater articulation and stepbacks of the upper
stories and a more ‘residential’ window proportion.
The project design has been revised to provide equal, high-quality design attention to all four building
elevations, including the rear elevation which is shared with 770 Second St. More vertical and horizontal
articulation and stepbacks have been incorporated into the upper stories. In addition, previously proposed
upper-story projections or encroachments over the sidewalk have been eliminated.
H-3. Public Information and Participation. Provide
information on housing programs and r elated issues.
Require and support public participation in the formulation
and review of the City’s housing policy, including
encouraging neighborhood involvement in development
review. Work with community groups to advocate
programs that will increase affordable housing supply and
opportunities. Ensure appropriate and adequate
involvement so that the design of new housing will
strengthen the character and integrity of the neighborhood.
H-3a. Neighborhood Meeting. Require neighborhood
meetings, as provided for by the City Council resolution
for Neighborhood Meeting Procedures, for larger
housing development proposals and those that have
potential to change neighborhood character. In larger
projects, the City requests that developers participate in
formal meetings with the community. The City
facilitates outreach by helping applicants find
information on the appropriate neighborhood groups to
contact. City staff attends meetings as a staff resource
and conducts noticing of meetings.
Consistent
A neighborhood meeting is not required; however, the applicant has previously met with the Gerstle Park
Neighborhood Association, the Montecito Homeowners Association and the Federation of San Rafael
Neighborhoods to discuss and solicit input on the proposed project
Notice of Conceptual Review for the project, by both the Board and the Planning Commission, the
Planning Commission study session and the Board’s May 7th review of the formal project design was
conducted in accordance with noticing requirements contained in Chapter 29 of the Zoning Ordinance. A
Notice of Public Meeting was mailed to all property owners, residents, businesses and occupants within a
300-foot radius of the project site and the appropriate neighborhood groups (Downtown Business
Improvement District, Federation of San Rafael Neighborhoods, Gerstle Park Neighborhood Assoc.,
Montecito Area Residents Assoc. and Lincoln-San Rafael Hill Neighborhood Assoc.), a minimum of 15
calendar days prior to the date of this hearing. Additionally, notice was posted on the project site, along the
Third St., Tamalpais Ave. and Lincoln Ave. frontages.
Notice of this Planning Commission meeting was also provided through mailed notices to property
owner/residents/business within 300 feet of the site, as well as applicable neighborhood/business
associations and posted along all three frontage s on the site.
Public comments received by staff on the project are evenly mixed; some in support of the project
proposing downtown housing and others in opposition to the project design, bulk/mass, height, and
Exhibit 3
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table
Exhibit: 3-7
perceived parking and traffic impacts. Public comments received through the conceptual review, during the
previous proposed design, are attached as Exhibit 8. Public comments received on the project, since formal
project review, with a revised improved design, are attached as Exhibit 9. Any comments received after
distribution of the staff report, will be forwarded to the Commission under separate cover .
Planning staff has also created a digital webpage on the project which has been uploaded with links to both
the current plans and supportive studies and is updated to coordinate with all meeting and hearing notices
for the project. This project webpage may be found from the City’s website, using the “Community
Development Department” link, then the “Planning Division” link and finally the “Major Planning Project”
link. The direct link to the project webpage is: https://www.cityofsanrafael.org/703-3.
.
H-9. Special Needs. Encourage a mix of housing unit
types throughout San Rafael, including very low- and
low-income housing for families with children, single
parents, students, young families, lower income seniors,
homeless and the disabled. Accessible units shall be
provided in multi-family developments, consistent with
State and Federal law.
Consistent
See H-1 discussion above.
Exhibit 3
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table
Exhibit: 3-8
H-14. Adequate Sites. Maintain an adequate supply of
land designated for all types of residential development to
meet the housing needs of all economic segments in San
Rafael. Within this total, the City shall also maintain a
sufficient supply of land for multifamily housing to meet
the quantified housing need of very low, low, and
moderate-income housing units. Encourage development
of residential uses in commercial areas where the vitality
of the area will not be adversely affected, and the site or
area will be enhanced by linking workers to jobs, and by
providing shared use of the site or area.
H-14a. Residential and Mixed-Use Sites Inventory.
Encourage residential development in areas appropriate
and feasible for new housing. These areas are identified
in Appendix B, Housing Element Background,
Summary of Potential Housing Sites (available for view
on the City’s website). Explore effective ways to share
housing site information and developer and financing
information to encourage development of underutilized
institutional land. The City has employed different
strategies to find the most effective way to deliver
information about development. It is an ongoing and
evolving process that has included practices such as
preparing fact sheets for sites with multiple inquiries.
H-14b. Efficient Use of Multifamily Housing Sites.
Do not approve residential-only development below
minimum designated General Plan densities unless
physical or environmental constraints preclude its
achievement. Residential-only projects should be
approved at the mid- to high-range of the zoning density.
If development on a site is to occur over time the
applicant must show that the proposed development does
not prevent subsequent development of the site to its
minimum density and provide guarantees that the
remaining phases will, in fact, be developed.
Consistent
See H-1 discussion above. The larger (723 Third St./898 Lincoln Ave.) of the two parcels within the
project site is listed in the San Rafael General Plan 2020 (2015-2023 Housing Element; Appendix B –
Background Report) as a “housing opportunity site” or as an underutilized m ixed-use site with the potential
to create a large number of affordable units. The project site is uniquely located in the Downtown, across
from the SMART downtown station and in close proximity of the relocated Bettini Transit Center (whose
future location has not been determined at this time). The project proposes high-density residential
development on in-fill parcels which allows high-density residential as part of a mixed-use project. The
project would result in the construction of 120 residential apartment units and a total of 12 BMR units,
including nine (9) required BMR units (5 BMRs at the very low-income household level and 4 BMRs at
the low-income household level) and three (3) additional voluntary BMR units at the moderate-income
household level for a fixed 10-year period.
Exhibit 3
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table
Exhibit: 3-9
H-14c. Continue to Implement Zoning Provisions to
Encourage Mixed Use. San Rafael has been effective in
integrating both vertical mixed use and higher density
residential development within its Downtown. As a
means of further encouraging mixed use in commercial
areas outside the Downtown, General Plan 2020 now
allows site development capacities to encompass the
aggregate of the maximum residential density PLUS the
maximum FAR for the site, thereby increasing
development potential on mixed use sites. The City will
continue to review development standards to facilitate
mixed use, including:
a. Encourage adaptive reuse of vacant buildings and
underutilized sites with residential and mixed use
development on retail, office, and appropriate
industrial sites
b. Explore zoning regulation incentives to encourage
lot consolidation where needed to facilitate housing.
c. Review zoning requirements for retail in a mixed-
use building or site and amend the zoning ordinance
as necessary to allow for residential-only buildings
in appropriate mixed-use zoning districts.
H-15. Infill Near Transit. Encourage higher densities on
sites adjacent to a transit hub, focusing on the Priority
Development Area surrounding the San Rafael
Transportation Center and future Downtown SMART
station.
H-15b. Downtown Station Area Plan. The coming of
SMART rail service to Downtown San Rafael in 2016 is
an opportunity to build on the work that the City has
undertaken to revitalize the Downtown and to create a
variety of transportation and housing options, economic
stability, and vibrant community gathering places in the
heart of San Rafael. General Plan 2020, adopted in 2004,
allowed for higher residential densities and reduced
residential parking standards to encourage housing
Consistent
See H-14 discussion above.
Exhibit 3
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table
Exhibit: 3-10
development within the heart of Downtown that would
support local businesses and allow people to live close to
their place of work. The Downtown Station Area Plan,
accepted by City Council in June 2012, establishes a
series of implementing actions, the following of which
specifically serve to facilitate higher density residential
and mixed-use infill in the area.
H-18. Inclusionary Housing. The City requires residential
projects to provide a percentage of affordable units on site
and/or pay in-lieu of fees for the development of
affordable units in another location. The City’s program
requires the units remain affordable for the longest feasible
time, or at least 55 years. The City's primary intent is the
construction of units on-site. The units should be of a
similar mix and type to that of the development as a whole
and dispersed throughout the development. If this is not
practical or not permitted by law, the City will consider
other alternatives of equal value, such as in-lieu fees,
construction of units off-site, donation of a portion of the
property for future non-profit housing development, etc.
Allow for flexibility in providing affordable units as long
as the intent of this policy is met. Specific requirements
are:
Project Size % Affordable Units Req'd
2 – 10 Housing Units* 10%
11 – 20 Housing Units 15%
21+ Housing Units 20%
* Exemptions for smaller projects units may be
provided for in the
Rental Units. Provide, consistent with State law, a
minimum of 50% of the BMR units affordable to very
low-income households at below 50% of median income,
with the remainder affordable to low income households at
50-80% of median income.
Sale/Ownership Units. Provide a minimum of 50% of the
Consistent
See H-1 discussion above. The project would exceed the City’s affordable housing requirement by
providing a total of 12 BMR units where nine (9) BMR units are required. The project proposes nine (9)
required BMR units (5 BMRs at the very low-income household level and 4 BMRs at the low-income
household level) plus three (3) additional voluntary BMR units at the moderate-income household level for
a fixed 10-year period.
Exhibit 3
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table
Exhibit: 3-11
BMR units affordable to low income households at 50 -
80% of median income, with the remainder affordable to
moderate income households at 80-120% of median
income.
Calculation of In-lieu Fee. Continue to provide a
calculation for in-lieu fees for affordable housing. For
fractions of affordable units, if 0.5 or more of a unit, the
developer shall construct the next higher whole number of
affordable units, and if less than 0.5 of a unit, the
developer shall provide an in-lieu fee.
NEIGHBORHOODS ELEMENT
NH-3. Housing Mix. Encourage a housing mix with a
broad range of affordability, character, and sizes. In areas
with a predominance of rental housing, encourage
ownership units to increase the variety of housing types.
Consistent
See H-1 discussion above. The project proposes to develop 120 new apartment units in a wide variety of
size configurations:
• 33, studio units, 342 – 539 sq. ft. in size.
• 44, 1-bedroom units, 525 – 795 sq. ft. in size.
• 43, 2-bedroom units, 520 – 1,068 sq. ft. in size.
NH-15. Downtown Vision. Continue to implement Our
Vision of Downtown San Rafael.
Consistent
See LU-12 discussion above. The proposed project is located should be consistent with as many of the
applicable policies in the adopted Our Vision of Downtown San Rafael; Second/Third Corridor Vision ,
including:
• Capitalize on the proximity to the freeway, Transportation Center and vitality of the Lindaro
District, in the area east of B Street with housing in mixed use projects with ground -floor retail
uses to support the needs of the residents and surrounding office uses.
• Make Second and Third Street more attractive and safer for pedestrians by: A) Planting for street
trees; B) creating a visual buffer between pedestrians and the street; and C) Reducing the number
of driveways which interrupt sidewalks.
• Encourage safe and efficient auto transportation to and through the Downtown on Second and
Third Streets and respect the needs of pedestrians. Second and Third Streets are the county access
streets.
• Vary building heights and densities, concentrating the most intense development towards the east,
closest to the freeway and Transportation Center, including building heights of two to five stories
Exhibit 3
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table
Exhibit: 3-12
and higher densities east of B Street and heights of one to three stories and lower densities west of
B Street.
The project would be consistent with the applicable policies in the Downtown Vision by incorporating the
following attributes: 1) providing multi-family housing in close proximity to the SMART train and Transit
Center, 2) incorporating a mix of retail and housing in the Downtown core, 3) enhancing the pedestrian
experience along Tamalpais Ave by widening the sidewalks and 4) providing a retail experience at the
corner of Third St/Tamalpais Ave. Furthermore, the project would enhance the streetscape by adding new
street trees and raised Corten streel planters along all three frontages to help create a pedestrian scale.
Driveway widths have been reduced to the minimum (20’) and the number of driveways servicing the
project have been limited to one (1) on both the Tamalpais and Lincoln Ave frontages. While the proposed
6-story building height is greater than that encouraged for the site by the vision document, the project
includes a request for height bonus as a concession under the State Density Bonus law.
NH-16. Economic Success. Substantially expand
Downtown’s economic success and increase opportunities
for retail, office and residential development
Consistent
See H-1 and H-14 discussions above. The project proposes to construct a total of 120 new residential in the
Downtown, adjacent to the SMART downtown station and in close proximity to the Bettini Transit Center
(the exact location of which is unknown at this time). Future residents are anticipated to frequent existing
and future businesses in the Downtown and help achieve the City’s goal of ‘alive-after-five’ by activating
the Downtown in the evenings and on weekends.
NH-17. Competing Concerns. In reviewing and making
decisions on projects, there are competing economic,
housing, environmental and design concerns that must be
balanced. No one factor should dominate; however,
economic and housing development are high priorities to
the health of Downtown.
Consistent
See LU-8, H-1 and H-14 discussions above. The project proposes to construct a total of 120 new
residential apartment units on the project site, 12 of which are proposed to be ‘affordable’ or BMR units.
The project proposes a six-story scale and mass similar to that of the existing BioMarin campus located
south of the project site. The project site is uniquely located in the Downtown, across from the SMART
downtown station and in close proximity to the relocated Bettini Transit Center (whose exact location has
not been determined at this time). Future residents are anticipated to frequent existing and future
businesses in the Downtown and help achieve the City’s goal of ‘alive-after-five’ by activating the
Downtown in the evenings and on weekends.
NH-22. Housing Downtown. Create a popular and
attractive residential environment that contributes to the
activity and sense of community Downtown. This
includes:
a. Preserving and upgrading existing units,
b. Providing incentives to encourage new private
sector construction of housing, particularly
Consistent
See LU-2, LU-8, H-14 and NH-16 discussions above. The project proposes to construct a total of 120 new
residential apartment units within the Downtown, across from the SMART downtown station and in close
proximity to the relocated Bettini Transit Center (whose exact location has not been determined at this
time). By meeting the City’s affordable housing requirement, the project is requesting a density bonus and
two (2) concession/incentives under the State Density Bonus law. One of the requested concessions is for a
height bonus to allow for the proposed 73’ building height, where a maximum of 66’ is allowed under the
Exhibit 3
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table
Exhibit: 3-13
affordable housing, live/work units, and single room
occupancy (SRO) units,
c. Designing units that take advantage of Downtown's
views, proximity to shopping and services, and
transit, and
d. Implementing zoning standards that reflect
Downtown’s urban character.
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The other requested concession is for a density bonus to allow the
proposed 120 units where a maximum of 61 units is allowed under the General Plan , Zoning Ordinance
and the minimum 35% State density bonus.
NH-25. Pedestrian Comfort and Safety. Make
Downtown's street systems more comfortable and safer for
pedestrians by:
• Balancing between the needs of pedestrians and the
desire for efficient traffic flow,
• Slowing traffic where necessary,
• Providing two-way traffic where feasible,
• Making pedestrian crossings direct and safe,
• Establishing pedestrian environments unique to each
District,
• Improving and/or expanding sidewalks, street trees,
landscaping and other sidewalk amenities,
• Increasing visibility to storefronts and businesses,
• Seeking innovative solutions and ideas.
Consistent
See NH-15 discussions above. Tamalpais Ave. is identified as a ‘gateway’ to the Downtown with excellent
visibility from all transportation modes (pedestrian, bicycle and transit) and the transit center. The project
helps activate the Tamalpais Ave street front by providing a small (969 sq. ft.) ground -level commercial
retail space at the corner of Tamalpais Ave. and Third St. The project helps create a more ‘pedestrian
street’ by widening the sidewalk along Tamalpais Ave., minimizing driveway cuts to a single driveway
with a 20’ width and providing ample street tree pockets with grates and raised Corten streel planters.
NH-29. Downtown Design. New and remodeled buildings
must contribute to Downtown’s hometown feel. Design
elements that enhance Downtown’s identity and
complement the existing attractive environment are
encouraged and may be required for locations with high
visibility or for compatibility with historic structures.
Design considerations include:
• Varied and distinctive building designs,
• Sensitive treatment of historic resources,
• Generous landscaping to accent buildings,
• Appropriate materials and construction, and
• Site design and streetscape continuity.
NH-29a. Implement Downtown Design Guidelines.
Consistent
See H-2 discussions above. The project site is located within the “Second/Third Corridor and Environs” of
Downtown where the following San Rafael Downtown Design Guidelines apply:
Second and Third Streets are to be attractive, landscaped major transportation corridors. While increased
pedestrian safety and comfort is desired on Second and Third, greater pedestrian use of the cros s streets is
encouraged. 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 along Second and Third Streets, varied landscape setbacks are
appropriate;
• Additional high-canopy, traffic-tolerant street trees are strongly encouraged;
• Where possible, residential buildings in this area should orient to the more pedestrian-friendly
Exhibit 3
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table
Exhibit: 3-14
Implement the Downtown Design Guidelines through
the design review process.
side street; and
• Driveway cuts and widths should be minimized to prevent vehicular conflicts.
The project proposes a contemporary design, similar to the nearby BioMarin campus buildings, though
with unique façade treatments (brick with Corten steel planters at the ground level and a mixture of stucco
and vertical and horizontal fiber cement board siding at the upper levels), greater articulation, stepping
back the upper stories and a more ‘residential’ window proportion. The proposed 6-story scale was
reviewed by both the Board and the Planning Commission during Conceptual Design Review and
supported. The project design has been revised to provide equal, high-quality design attention to all four
building elevations, including the rear elevation which is shared with 770 Second St. Better vertical and
horizontal articulation and stepbacks of the upper stories have been incorporate in the revised project
design. In addition, previously proposed upper-story projections or encroachments over the sidewalk have
been eliminated. Extensive landscaping in the form of street trees and Corten steel raise planter along all
three street fronts is proposed to help create a pedestrian scale. The project proposes to orient pedestrian
activity through the lobby area both through the main entry on Third St and at the northwest corner of
Third St./Lincoln Ave. At their subsequent study session on the revised project, the Planning Commission
more specifically indicated their support for the proposed height bonuses if greater affordability could be
provided. In response to the Planning Commission’s request, the current project proposes a total of 12
affordable or BMR units. This proposed affordability includes 9 BMR uni ts (5 BMR units at the very low-
income household level and 4 BMR units at the low-income household level) required by State Density
Bonus law plus and an additional three (3) BMR units voluntarily provided at the moderate -income
household levels for a fixed 10-year period.
NH-30. Pedestrian Environments. Enhance Downtown’s
streets by establishing pedestrian environments appropriate
to each District. These environments could include the
following:
• Well-designed window displays and views into retail
stores,
• Outdoor businesses and street vendors,
• Signs that are easy for pedestrians to see and read,
• Sun-filled outdoor courtyards, plazas and seating areas,
• Attractive street furniture and lighting,
• Information kiosks and public art.
Consistent
See NH-25 discussion above.
NH-31. Ground Floor Designed for Pedestrians. Ensure
that all buildings, regardless of height, are comfortable for
Consistent
See NH-15 and NH-29 discussions above. The project proposes to help create a pedestrian scale through
Exhibit 3
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table
Exhibit: 3-15
people at the street level. This includes:
• Relating wall and window heights to the height of
people,
• Use of architectural elements to create visual interest,
• Adding landscaping and insets and alcoves for
pedestrian interest, and,
• Stepping upper stories back as building height
increases.
the following design measures:
• The project proposes to provide a small (969 sq. ft.) ground -level commercial retail space at the
corner of Tamalpais Ave. and Third St. with entrances along both street fronts;
• The project proposes a recessed main lobby entrance along the Third St. frontage;
• The project proposes large storefront windows along all three frontages;
• The project proposes to minimize driveway cuts to a single 20’-wide driveway along both
Tamalpais and Lincoln Ave. frontages;
• The project proposes extensive ground-level landscaping in the form of street trees and Corten
steel raise planter along all three street fronts; and
• The project proposes a ‘base, middle and top’ design strategy, with a brick podium level, stucco
mid-levels which are articulated and recessed, and a combination of stucco and fiber -cement
siding boards (oriented horizontal and vertical) upper-floors which have greater articulation and
further setbacks.
NH-37. Hetherton Office District Design
Considerations.
____________________
c. Hetherton Design. Encourage projects of high quality
and varied design with landmark features that enhance
the District's gateway image. Examples include:
• Building design emphasizing the gateway character
and complementing the district’s transitional treatment
by incorporating accent elements, public art and other
feature items,
• Upper stories stepped back,
• Ground floor areas have a pedestrian scale,
• Retail uses opening onto public areas,
• Useable outdoor spaces, courtyards and arcades that
are landscaped, in sunny locations and protected
from freeway noise.
____________________
e. Height. Building heights of three to five stories are
allowed west of the rail transitway, and typically up to
three stories east of the rail transitway.
Consistent
See NH-15, NH-29 and NH-31 discussions above. Tamalpais Ave. is identified as a ‘gateway’ to the
Downtown with excellent visibility from all transportation modes (pedestrian, bicycle and transit) an d the
transit center. The project activates the Tamalpais Ave street front by providing a small (969 sq. ft.)
ground-level commercial retail space at the corner of Tamalpais Ave. and Third St. The project supports
Tamalpais Ave. as a ‘pedestrian street’ by minimizing driveway cuts to a single driveway with a 20’ width
and providing ample street tree pockets with grates. Larger and taller buildings, like the project, are
anticipated along the Second and Third St. corridors to create a ‘boulevard’ setting. A ‘base, middle and
top’ design strategy, similar to the project design, is encouraged though not required. The height and bulk
of the project is mitigated by stepbacks, articulation and use of varied exterior materials.
While the proposed 6-story building height is greater than that which is encouraged for the site by
Hetherton Design Guidelines, the project includes a request for height bonus as a concession under the
State Density Bonus law. The applicant has submitted a financial pro forma in support of the proposed
height concession which has been reviewed by the City’s 3rd party economic consultant who confirms the
financial pro forma provides verified economic data that suggests the proposed 6 -story/73’building height
is needed to make the project financially feasible.
The project proposes 12,555 sq. ft. of landscaped common outdoor space, including 4,528 sq. ft. of
landscaped area on the podium (2nd floor)-level between a central courtyard and common outdoor deck
areas along the front (Third St. elevation) and rear (adjacent to the paint store located at 770 Second St.)
building elevations and a 5,317 sq. ft. landscaped rooftop amenities area,
Exhibit 3
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table
Exhibit: 3-16
COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT
CD-1. City Image. Reinforce the City’s positive and
distinctive image by recognizing the natural features
of the City, protecting historic resources, and by
strengthening the positive qualities of the City's focal
points, gateways, corridors and neighborhoods.
CD-1d. Landscape Improvement. Recognize that
landscaping is a critical design component. Encourage
maximum use of available landscape area to create
visual interest and foster sense of the natural
environment in new and existing developments.
Encourage the use of a variety of site appropriate plant
materials.
Consistent
See NH-37 discussion above. The project proposes 12,555 sq. ft. (46%) of site landscaping, where a
minimum 10% (2,737 sq. ft.) is required. New street trees are proposed along all three building frontages
on the ground-floor. A combined 4,528 sq. ft. of landscaped area is proposed on the podium (2nd floor)-
level between a central courtyard and common outdoor deck areas along the front (Third St. elevation) and
rear (adjacent to the paint store located at 770 Second St.) building elevations. A landscaped roofto p
amenities area, 5,317 sq. ft. in size, is also proposed. In addition, the project proposes raised Corten steel
planters along the ground-floor of the Third St. frontage. On May 7, 2019, the Board reviewed the formal
project for site and building design and unanimously (4-0-2 vote; Planning Commission Liaison Davidson)
recommended approval of the site and building design with enhanced “Gateway Corner” (Third St. and
Tamalpais Ave.) façade treatments (unique materials and colors), including the proposed site landscaping.
CD-2. Neighborhood Identity. Recognize and promote
the unique character and integrity of the city's residential
neighborhoods and Downtown. Strengthen the
"hometown" image of San Rafael by:
• Maintaining the urban, historic, and pedestrian
character of the Downtown;
• Preserving and enhancing the scale and landscaped
character of the City's residential neighborhoods;
• Improving the appearance and function of
commercial areas; and
• Allowing limited commercial uses in residential
neighborhoods that serve local residents and create
neighborhood-gathering places.
Consistent
See CD-1, NH-15 and NH-31 discussions above.
CD-3. Neighborhoods. Recognize, preserve and enhance
the positive qualities that give neighborhoods their unique
identities, while also allowing flexibility for innovative
design. Develop programs to encourage and respect the
context and scale of existing neighborhoods.
Consistent
See CD-1, NH-15 and NH-31 discussions above.
CD-5. Views. Respect and enhance to the greatest extent Consistent
Exhibit 3
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table
Exhibit: 3-17
possible, views of the Bay and its islands, Bay wetlands,
St. Raphael’s church bell tower, Canalfront, marinas, Mt.
Tamalpais, Marin Civic Center and hills and ridgelines
from public streets, parks and publicly accessible
pathways.
Photo simulations were created by the applicant and submitted within the project plans, which indicate
minor view impacts of the surrounding hillsides west and north of the project site. These potential view
impacts would be similar to those resulting from development of the adjacent BioMarin campus.
CD-7. Downtown and Marin Civic Center. Build upon
the character of these areas by controlling land uses to
clearly distinguish their boundaries; by recognizing
Mission San Rafael Arcangel and St. Raphael Church,
Marin Civic Center, and other buildings that help define
the City’s character, and requiring that these and other
architectural characteristics and land uses that give these
areas their identity are strengthened.
Consistent
See CD-5 discussion above. The project would create limited view impacts of the Puerto Suello Hill,
located north of the project site, and the hillside above Gerstle Park, located west of the project site, from
viewsheds along westbound Third St, eastbound and westbound Second St., northbound Tamalpais Ave.,
northbound Lincoln Ave. and southbound U.S. Highway 101.
CD-8. Gateways. Provide and maintain distinctive
gateways to identify City entryways.
Consistent
See NH-15, NH-31 and NH-37 discussions above. Tamalpais Ave. is identified as a ‘gateway’ to the
Downtown with excellent visibility from all transportation modes (pedestrian, bicycle and transit). The
project proposes to help create a pedestrian scale through a variety of design measures, including ground-
level landscaping, storefront windows and a neighborhood-serving commercial space, wide sidewalks,
reduced driveway widths, and a ‘base, middle and top’ architecture, with a brick façade on the ground-
level which is distinct from the stucco mid-levels and the combination of stucco and fiber-cement siding
boards (oriented horizontal and vertical) upper-floors.
CD-9. Transportation Corridors. Provide and maintain
distinctive gateways to identify City entryways.
Consistent
See CD-8 discussion above.
CD-11. Multifamily Design Guidelines. Recognize,
preserve and enhance the design elements that ensure
multifamily housing is visually and functionally
compatible with other buildings in the neighborhood.
Develop design guidelines to. ensure that new
development fits within and improves the character
defining elements of neighborhoods.
Consistent
See H-2 and NH-29 discussions above. The project proposes a bulk and mass similar to the adjacent
BioMarin campus located south of the project site. While the BioMarin campus buildings and structures
are 3-4 stories, they are 54 – 76 ft. in height. Of the seven (7) buildings and structures currently existing
within the BioMarin campus, three (3) are taller than the proposed height of the project (73’).
CD-14. Recreational Areas. In multifamily development, Consistent
Exhibit 3
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table
Exhibit: 3-18
require private outdoor areas and on-site common spaces
for low and medium densities. In high density and mixed -
use development, private and/or common outdoor spaces
are encouraged. Common spaces may include recreation
facilities, gathering spaces, and site amenities such as
picnicking and play areas.
Useable outdoor area is encouraged, though not required, in residential development as part of a mixed -use
project. The project proposes 2,738 combined sq. ft. of private balconies to select residential units on the
upper floors (floor 2 through 6). The project also proposes 4,353 combined sq. ft. of common outdoor area
on the podium (2nd floor) level, within a central landscaped courtyard and along the front and rear
elevations. The project proposes an additional 5,317 sq. ft. of common outdoor area through a landscaped
roof deck. Overall, the project proposes 12,408 sq. ft. of private and common outdoor recreational area or
an average of 103.4 sq. ft. of recreational area per unit.
CD-15. Participation in Project Review. Provide for
public involvement in the review of new development,
renovations, and public projects with the following
• Design guidelines and other information relevant to the
project as described in the Community Design Element
that would be used by residents, designers, project
developers, City staff, and City decision makers;
• Distribution of the procedures of the development
process that include the following: submittal
information, timelines for public review, and public
notice requirements;
• Standardized thresholds that state when design review of
projects is required (e.g. residential conversions, second -
story additions); and
• Effective public participation in the review process.
Consistent
The proposed project has provided for effective citizen participation in decision-making, given that; the
City has provided opportunities for public involvement in the review of the project through the referral of
the application to the appropriate neighborhood groups (Downtown BID, Federation of San Rafael
Neighborhoods, Gerstle Park Neighborhood Assoc., Lincoln-San Rafael Hill Neighborhood Assoc., Bret
Harte Community Assoc., Montecito Area Residents Assoc.) and the notice and meeting/hearing of the
prior conceptual review by the Board, the Planning Commission study session, the Board’s recent (May 7,
2019) review of the formal project design and this Planning Commission hearing on the formal project
submittal in compliance with Chapter 29 of the Zoning Ordinance (Public Notice). Notice of all hearing
were mailed to all property owners and occupants within a 300 -foot radius of the site, and the appropriate
neighborhood groups, a minimum of 15 calendar days prior to the meetings or hearing, and notice was
posted on the project site, along all three (3) frontages (Third St, Lincoln Ave. and Tamalpais Ave.), a
minimum of 15 calendar days prior to the meeting or hearing. Public comments received by staff on the
project are evenly mixed; some in support of the project proposing downtown housing and others in
opposition to the project design, bulk/mass, height, and perceived parking and traffic impacts . Public
comments received through the conceptual review, during the previous proposed design, are attached as
Exhibit 8. Public comments received on the project, since formal project review, with a revised improved
design, are attached as Exhibit 9.
CD-18. Landscaping. Recognize the unique contribution
provided by landscaping and make it a significant
component of all site design.
Consistent
See CD-1 and CD-14 discussions above.
CD-19. Lighting. Allow adequate site lighting for safety
purposes while controlling excessive light spillover and
glare.
Consistent with Conditions
The project proposes exterior lighting along all three (3) street fronts. LED sconce -type light fixtures are
proposed to provide accent lighting for brick pillars at ground level along all three street frontages. Cut
sheets for the light fixtures indicate these would use a 10-watt / 3,000 kelvin light source which would
create a ‘warm’ light appearance. The light fixtures are proposed to be bronze finished with vertical slats
which would match the perforated vertical slat design of the balcony railing and sunshade detailing. A
Exhibit 3
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table
Exhibit: 3-19
condition of approval would be included establishing a 90-day lighting review period at final
inspection/occupancy where adjustments in lighting may be required by staff to reduce off-site glare, if
necessary.
CIRCULATION ELEMENT
C-5. Traffic Level of Service Standards.
a. Intersection LOS. In order to ensure an effective
roadway network, maintain adequate traffic levels of
service (LOS) consistent with standards for signalized
intersections in the A.M. and P.M. peak hours as shown
below, except as provided for under (B) Arteria l LOS.
Consistent with conditions
The City’s Traffic Engineer has reviewed the project and evaluated its traffic impacts against the City’s
level of service standards. A Transportation Impact Analysis report (Fehr & Peers Transportation
Consultants, revision dated January 14, 2019) originally submitted for the project was revised to expand
the study area and to modify the methodology used in the analysis. The results of the updated trip
generation indicate that, based on traffic counts of existing land use trips, and with deductions applied for
‘walk, bike and transit’ trips due to the site’s proximity to the Downtown, the SMART station and the
transit center, the project would result in 33 net new AM peak hour trips (7 - 9am weekdays) and 26 PM net
new peak hour trips (4-6pm weekdays). The Transportation Impact Analysis report indicates surrounding
intersections and arterials would continue to operate (existing plus project volumes) acceptably per the
City’s LOS (Level of Service) standards in the General Plan. The results of the Transportation Impact
Analysis report have been confirmed by the City’s Traffic Engineer. Staff finds the proposed density (120
units) would result in negligible traffic impacts which are off-set by the payment of traffic mitigation fees
on the 59 new peak hour trips anticipated to result from the project, which would be a condition of
approval. The payment of traffic mitigation fees would be a condition of approval and are intended to help
fund the project’s fair share of local circulation improvement projects by the City.
Exhibit 3
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table
Exhibit: 3-20
C-7. Circulation Improvement Funding.
Take a strong advocacy role in securing funding for
planned circulation improvements. Continue to seek
comprehensive funding that includes Federal, State,
County, and Redevelopment funding, Local Traffic
Mitigation Fees, and Assessment Districts. The local
development projects’ share of responsibility to fund
improvements is based on:
C-7a. Traffic Mitigation Fees. Continue to implement
and periodically update the City’s Traffic Mitigation
Program.
C-7b. Circulation Improvements. Seek funding for and
construct circulation improvements needed for safety, to
improve circulation, or to maintain traffic level of
service.
Consistent with conditions
See C-5 discussion above.
CD-26. Bicycle Plan Implementation. Make bicycling
and walking an integral part of daily life in San Rafael by
implementing the San Rafael’s Bicycle and Pedestrian
Master Plan.
Consistent
The City’s Traffic Engineer reviewed the project for compliance with the goals and programs identified in
the City’s 2018 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Update 2018 . The Tamalpais Avenue Feasibility Study
is currently ongoing with the goal to convert West Tamalpais Ave. into a one-way street in the southbound
direction; create a Class IV protected bikeway between West Tamalpais and SMART right-of-way; create
improved bicycle and pedestrian crossings at intersections and connection to the existing Class I multi -use
path to Hetherton St. Alternatively, a continuation of the Class I multi-use path is being considered as part
of the SF Bay Trail alignment.
.
CD-27. Pedestrian Plan Implementation. Promote
walking as the transportation mode of choice for short trips
by implementing the pedestrian element of the City’s
Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. In addition to policies
and programs outlined in the Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan,
provide support for the following programs.
Consistent
See C-26 discussion above.
INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENT
I-2. Adequacy of City Infrastructure and Services.
Assure that development can be adequately served by the
Consistent
All service providers, including PG&E, Marin Sanitary Service, Marin Municipal Water District, San
Exhibit 3
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table
Exhibit: 3-21
City’s infrastructure and that new facilities are well
planned and well designed.
Rafael Sanitation District, Central Marin Sanitation Agency, and the City Engineer, have review the
project and indicated that adequate infrastructure capacity exists for the project.
SUSTAINABILITY ELEMENT
SU-5. Reduce Use of Non-renewable Resources Reduce
dependency on non-renewable resources.
_______________
SU-5d Water Efficiency Programs. Develop and
implement water efficiency and conservation programs
to achieve a 30% reduction in water use by 2020,
including water efficient landscape regulations, PACE
financing, water audits, upgrades upon resale, education
and outreach. Make available to property managers,
designers and homeowners’ information about water-
conserving landscaping and water-recycling methods
and resources.
Consistent
The project is subject to a condition requiring compliance with the most recent water conservation
ordinance adopted by Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD). Prior the building permit issuance,
MMWD is required to review and approve the proposed landscape and irrigation plans and provide the
applicant with a letter of approval or an approved -stamped plan set either of which shall be submitted with
the building permit.
SU-7. New and Existing Trees. Plant new and retain
existing trees to maximize energy conservation and
carbon sequestration benefits.
Consistent
The landscape plan for the project proposes new street trees and grates along all three (3) frontages. In
addition, new trees are proposed within common areas for the central court yard on the podium (2nd floor)
level and on the roof deck. The landscape plan provides no details on the specific trees along the street or
within these common areas of the project site. Eight (8) existing street trees (3 along the Tamalpais Ave.
frontage, 1 along the Third St. frontage and 4 along he Lincoln Ave. frontage) and four (4) existing trees
within the project site are proposed to be removed.
CULTURE AND ARTS ELEMENT
CA-15. Protection of Archaeological Resources.
Recognize the importance of protecting significant
archaeological resources by:
• Identifying, when possible, archaeological
resources and potential impacts on such
resources.
Consistent with conditions
The project site is identified as having a “medium” archaeological sensitivity rating, pursuant to the City’s
adoptive City of San Rafael Archaeological Sensitivity map. City Council Ordinance No. 1772 and
Resolution No. 10980 prescribes referral of the project to the Northwest Information Center at Sonoma
State University (NWIC) for review. NWIC concluded that, while finding no record of cultural resource
study on the project site, the possibility of unrecorded cultural resources exists. NWIC recommends that,
Exhibit 3
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table
Exhibit: 3-22
• Providing information and direction to property
owners in order to make them aware of these
resources.
• Implementing measures to preserve and protect
archaeological resources.
CA-15a. Archeological Resources Ordinance.
Continue to implement the existing Archeological
Resources Ordinance.
prior to demolition or other ground disturbance, a qualified archaeologist conduct further archival research
and field study to identify archaeological resources, including a good faith effort to identify archaeological
deposits that may show no indication on the surface. This recommendation has been incorporated as a
condition of approval.
PARK AND RECREATION ELEMENT
PR-10. Onsite Recreation Facilities. Require onsite
recreation facilities in new multifamily residential projects
and encourage construction of onsite recreation facilities in
existing multifamily residential projects, where
appropriate.
Consistent
See CD-14 discussion above. In addition to the common recreational areas proposed by the project on the
podium (2nd floor) level and roof deck, the project plans propose both a 593 sq. ft. community room and a
279 sq. ft. gym on the podium level.
PR-24. Contributions by Rental Residential
Development. Explore the feasibility of requiring
contributions from rental residential development towards
park improvements.
PR-24a. Rental Residential Contributions. Evaluate
the feasibility of adopting an ordinance to require
developers of apartments to contribute to park
improvements.
Consistent
Currently, only projects proposing new ownership or condominium units are required to pay Parkland
Dedication Fees (currently $1,967.98 per unit). Currently, no ordinance has been adopted requiring
development of rental or apartment units to pay impact fees for new parks or park improvements.
SAFETY ELEMENT
S-1. Location of Future Development. Permit
development only in those areas where potential danger to
the health, safety and welfare of the residents of the
community can be adequately mitigated.
Consistent
Geoseismic analysis have been evaluated through the City’s Geotechnical Review process and found that
the project would not pose potential danger to the health, safety and welfare of the community.
S-4. Geotechnical Review. Continue to require
geotechnical investigations for development proposals as
Consistent
A Geotechnical Investigation Report was prepared and submitted with the project application. After review
Exhibit 3
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table
Exhibit: 3-23
set forth in the City's Geotechnical Review Matrix
(Appendix F). Such studies should determine the actual
extent of geotechnical hazards, optimum design for
structures, the advisability of special structural
requirements, and the feasibility and desirability of a
proposed facility in a specified location.
by the City Engineer and Chief Building Official, it was found to meet the requirements set forth in the
Geotechnical Review Matrix and consistent with the City’s safety policies and standard engineering
practices.
S-6. Seismic Safety of New Buildings. Design and
construct all new buildings to resist stresses produced by
earthquakes. The minimum level of seismic design shall be
in accordance with the most recently adopted building
code as required by State law.
Consistent with conditions
The project would entail all new construction and would be constructed in accordance with the most
current building and seismic codes as required by the City’s Municipal Code.
S-17. Flood Protection of New Development. Design
new development within the bay mud areas to minimum
floor elevation that provides protection from potential
impacts of flooding during the “100-year” flood. The final
floor elevation (elevation of the first floor at completion of
construction) shall account for the ultimate settlement of
the site due to consolidation of the bay mud from existing
and new loads, taking into account soils conditions and the
type of structure proposed. Design for settlement over a
50-year period is typically considered sufficient.
Consistent
The site is currently located in FEMA Zone AH, a 100-year flood zone area. The Public Works
Department recommends the project provide a flood elevation of 12’. By meeting the affordable housing
requirement (20% or 9 BMR units), the project requests two (2) concessions under the State Density Bonus
law. One of the requested concessions is for a 7’ height bonus above the maximum 66’ allowed by the
Zoning Ordinance (54’ base height plus and additional 12’ height bonus for meeting the affordable housing
requirement). This request for additional height bonus under the State Density Bonus law is based,
partially, on meeting the FEMA flood elevation requirements (Other justifications for the height bonus
request include raising the garage plate height 3.5’, from 18.5’ to 22’, to accommodate the mechanical
parking lift system and to increase the plate height of each residential floor one -half foot (½’), from 9’ to
9.5’, resulting in another 2.5’ increase in the overall height).
S-25. Regional Water Quality Control Board
(RWQCB) Requirements. Continue to work through the
Marin County Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program
(MCSTPPP) to implement appropriate Watershed
Management plans as dictated in the RWQCB general
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit
for Marin County and the local stormwater plan.
Consistent with conditions
The City Engineer has reviewed the proposed project, including Stormwater Control Plan, and determined
it preliminarily implements the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program standards and regulations. As
designed, the proposed project includes measures likely to reduce stormwater run-off consistent with the
standards established by the RWQCB.
S-32. Safety Review of Development Projects. Require
crime prevention and fire prevention techniques in new
development, including adequate access for emergency
vehicles.
Consistent
The San Rafael Fire Department, Fire Prevention Bureau, and the San Rafael Police Department have both
reviewed the project plans and recommended modifications to improve fire prevention and safe design
which would not affect the current project design being reviewed by the Commission though would
Exhibit 3
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table
Exhibit: 3-24
become conditions of approval.
NOISE ELEMENT
N-1. Noise Impacts on New Development. Protect people
in new development from excessive noise by applying
noise standards in land use decisions. Apply the Land Use
Compatibility Standards (see Exhibit 31) to the siting of
new uses in existing noise environments. These standards
identify the acceptability of a project based on noise
exposure. If a project exceeds the standards in Exhibit 31,
an acoustical analysis shall be required to identify noise
impacts and potential noise mitigations. Mitigation should
include the research and use of state-of-the-art abating
materials and technology.
N-1a. Acoustical Studies. Require acoustical studies for
all new residential projects within the projected Ldn 60
dB noise contours (see Exhibit 31) so that noise
mitigation measures can be incorporated into project
design. Acoustical studies shall identify noise sources
and contain a discussion of the existing and future noise
exposure and the mitigation measures that may be used
to achieve the appropriate outdoor and indoor noise
standards.
Consistent with conditions
A Noise Study (RGD Acoustics; dated May 25, 2018) was prepared for the project and determined the
noise impacts to the project would be ‘conditional acceptable’ and recommended the following noise
reduction and insulation features be included in the project design: 1) The proposed solid 4’-tall parapet
sound wall increase in height to 6’ around the roof deck; 2) sound-rated windows and specifically
constructed exterior wall assemblies will be required at the time of building permit submittal (i.e., most
windows will require an STC (Sound Transmission Class) 36 rating, some corner units will require
windows with higher ratings, balcony doors will need to be sound -rated, and some wall assemblies with
siding will require additional layers of gypsum); 3) All construction equipment shall operate with
maintained mufflers and other state required noise attenuation devices; 4) Property owners and occupants
within a 250 ft. radius of the project site shall receive notice 15 days prior commencement of construction
of each phase, regarding the construction schedule of the project, subject to review and approval by
Planning staff. These notices shall indicate dates and duration o f construction activities and provide a
contact name and telephone number to inquire about the construction schedule and register complaints;5)
The project shall designate a Noise Disturbance Coordinator (NDC) to be present on-site during all grading
and construction activities, who name and contact details shall be included in all notices. The NDC shall be
responsible for responding to all complaints about grading and construction noise. When a compliant is
received, the NDC shall notify Planning staff within 24-hours of the complaint, determine the cause of the
complaint and implement reasonable measures to resolve the complaint, as deemed acceptable by Planning
staff. In addition, the name and contact information of the NDC shall be posted on the site and legible from
a distance of 50 ft.; 6) Noise reduction methods shall be utilized during all grading and construction
activities where feasible, including shutting off idling equipment, installing temporary acoustic barriers
around stationary construction noise sources, maximizing the distance between construction equipment
staging areas and occupied residential areas, and electric air compressors and similar power tools; 7)
Grading and construction haul truck routes shall be designated to avoid sensitive re ceptors, such as
residences and convalescent homes, to the greatest extent feasible; and 8) During construction activities,
stationary construction equipment shall be located such that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive
receptors. These recommendations by the Noise Study will be incorporated as conditions of approval.
N-5. Traffic Noise from New Development. Minimize
noise impacts of increased off-site traffic caused by new
development. Where the exterior Ldn is 65 dB or greater at
Consistent
Due to the location of the project site in the Downtown, adjacent to the SMART downtown station and in
close proximity to the relocated Bettini Transit Center (whose exact location has not been determined at
Exhibit 3
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table
Exhibit: 3-25
a residential building or outdoor use area and a plan,
program, or project increases traffic noise levels by more
than Ldn 3 dB, reasonable noise mitigation measures shall
be included in the plan, program or project.
this time), noise impacts of increased traffic caused by the project is anticipated to be negligible.
AIR AND WATER QUALITY ELEMENT
AW-1. State and Federal Standards. Continue to comply
and strive to exceed state and federal standards for air
quality for the benefit of the Bay Area.
Consistent
An Air Quality Analysis and Health Risk Assessment (Ramboll; dated January 19, 2019) was prepared and
submitted, determining no significant air quality impacts from construction and operation emissions would
result from the project. Based on the size of the project and Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD) screening methods, both construction and operational mass emissions are estimated to be
below BAAQMD CEQA thresholds. Health risk imp -acts from both construction and operation are
expected to be less than BAAQMD CEQA thresholds based on a conservative screening assessment for
operations and dispersion modeling and refined risk analysis for construction. This analysis also shows that
areas of the project site will not experience excess lifetime cancer risks, chronic hazard indices , and PM
2.5 (particulate matter of aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 microns or less) concentrations above cumulative
threshold of significance.
AW-7. Local, State and Federal Standards. Continue to
comply with local, state and federal standards for water
quality.
Consistent
The project would be required to comply with the City’s Stormwater Pollution Prevention standards which
are derived from the Regional Water Quality Board. The drainage plan is designed to be consistent with
the stormwater pollution standards by treating roof rainwater runoff on-site in landscape bioswale filtration
areas, located through the project, before it enters into the City’s storm drain system.
AW-8. Reduce Pollution from Urban Runoff. Address
non-point source pollution and protect receiving waters
from pollutants discharged to the storm drain system by
requiring Best Management Practices quality.
• Support alternatives to impervious surfaces in new
development, redevelopment or public improvement
projects to reduce urban runoff into storm drain
system, creeks and the Bay.
• Require that site designs work with the natural
topography and drainages to the extent practicable to
Consistent
See AW-7 discussion above.
Exhibit 3
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table
Exhibit: 3-26
reduce the amount of grading necessary and limit
disturbance to natural water bodies and natural
drainage systems.
• Where feasible, use vegetation to absorb and filter
fertilizers, pesticides and other pollutants.
Exhibit 4
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAEL ZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 14)
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table
Exhibit: 4-1
CHAPTER 5 – COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE DISTRICTS;
SECOND/THIRD MIXED USE EAST (2/3 MUE) DISTRICT
14.05.010 - Specific Purposes. In addition to the general purposes listed in
Section 14.01.030, the specific purposes of the commercial and office
zoning districts include the following:
----------------
F. To promote San Rafael's downtown area as a viable commercial and
financial center, and as an urban center with a mixture of civic, social,
entertainment, cultural and residential use s;
---------------
H. To provide housing opportunities by encouraging a variety of housing
in mixed -use districts.
---------------
R. Second/Third Mixed Use District East (2/3 MUE):
1. Existing Character. The Second/Third mixed use district east is
part of a major transpo rtation corridor bordering the southern edge
of downtown, from Highway 101 to Brooks Street. The district is
comprised of a "one-way pair" of Second and Third Streets
carrying traffic through downtown. There is a mix of uses,
including large and small-scale offices and retail shops, and
residential uses. This area is highly visible to the Marin
community, is adjacent to the planned vitality of the Lindaro
office district and provides many opportunities to enhance the
overall impression of downtown .
2. Allo wed Uses. The Second/Third mixed use district east is to
become more attractive, efficient and better utilized with a mix of
compatible uses serving local, community and regional needs.
Because of the district's proximity to Highway 101 and the
Transportation Center, this area is suitable for office and office -
support retail and service uses. Limited auto -serving retail stores
Consistent
The project proposes to redevelop two adjacent in-fill parcels, currently served by City
infrastructure and services. The smaller parcel (703 Third St.) is located at the southwest
corner of Third St. and Tamalpais Ave. while the larger parcel (723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln
Ave.) is located at the southeast corner of Third St. and Lincoln Ave. Both parcels are
located with Second/Third St. Mixed-Use East (2/3 MUE) District zone, a Downtown
commercial zoning district. The project proposes to demolish approximately 15,000 sq. ft.
of combined commercial space within two, 1-2-story buildings and a surface parking lot
and construct a new, six-story, 73-tall mixed-use building with 120 apartment units above
121 garage parking spaces, of which 109 parking spaces will be provided by mechanical
parking lifts. The project is required to provide nine (9) affordable (‘below-market-rate or
BMR) units and, due to a request made at the Planning Commission study session for more
affordability in order to support height and density bonuses, proposes to voluntarily
provide an additional three (3) BMR units.
The larger (723 Third St./898 Lincoln Ave.) of the two parcels within the project site is
listed in the San Rafael General Plan 2020 (2015-2023 Housing Element; Appendix B –
Background Report) as a “housing opportunity site” or as an underutilized mixed -use site
with the potential to create a large number of affordable units. The project site is uniquely
located in the Downtown, across from the SMART downtown station and in close
proximity of the relocated Bettini Transit Center (whose exact location has not been
determined at this time). Future residents are anticipated to frequent existing and future
businesses in the Downtown and help achieve the City’s goal of ‘alive -after-five’ by
helping to activate the Downtown in the evenings and on weekends.
The project proposes to develop 120 new apartment units in a wide variety of size
configurations:
• 33, studio units, 342 – 539 sq. ft. in size.
• 44, 1-bedroom units, 525 – 795 sq. ft. in size.
• 43, 2-bedroom units, 520 – 1,068 sq. ft. in size
Exhibit 4
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAEL ZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 14)
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table
Exhibit: 4-2
are allowed. Housing is encouraged as part of a mixed-use project.
3. Design Intent. New development will help create an inviting
appearance to Second and Third Streets. Parking areas should be
attractive and screened, yet easy-to-find. Because of the high
volume of traffic, the street front design should give special
attention to pedestrian safety and comfort through setbacks and
landscaping. This district has one of the highest levels of
development intensity downtown because of its proximity to the
Highway and the Transportation Center. Building heights are four
(4) stories with height and FAR bonuses possible in limited
circumstances to allow buildings up to five (5) stories when
desirable amenities are provid ed.
14.05. 022 - Land Use Regulations (2/3 MUE)
A wide variety of commercial uses is permitted-by-right or with Use Permit
approval in the 2/3 MUE District. Multifamily residential land uses are
allowed in the 2/3 MUE District zone, as part of mixed-use development
and subject to administrative Use Permit approval.
.
Consistent
The project proposes to redevelop the project site with a mixed-use building with 120
multifamily residential apartment units above 969 sq. ft. of ground-level commercial retail
space and 121 garage parking spaces. The project application requests a Use Permit, in
addition to an Environmental and Design Review Permit and a Lot Line Consolidation, to
allow the multifamily residential land use in a commercial zoning district as part of a
mixed-use redevelopment project.
14.05.032 - Property Development Regulations (2/3 MUE)
• Maximum density: 600 sq. ft. of lot area/unit
• Maximum FAR (Floor Area Ratio): 1.5 FAR
• Minimum front yard setback: 5’
• Maximum height: 54’
• Minimum landscaping: 10%
• Minimum usable outdoor area: voluntary
Consistent with conditions
As designed, the project is generally consistent with the applicable property development
standards.
By meeting the City’s affordable housing requirement (20% or 9 BMR units), the project
requests the maximum 35% density bonus (16 additional market-rate units) under the State
Density Bonus law and up to two (2) concessions/incentives. One of these requested
concessions is a 59-unit density bonus above and beyond the 35% density bonus allowed
under the State Density Bonus law. The project has submitted a financial pro forma
providing documentation that the proposed 120-unit density is required to make the project
financially feasible. This financial pro forma was reviewed by the City 3 rd party economic
consultant who confirmed the proposed density is necessary to make the project financially
feasible.
Exhibit 4
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAEL ZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 14)
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table
Exhibit: 4-3
By meeting the City’s affordable housing requirement, the project is allowed an automatic
height bonus of 12’, increasing the maximum height to 66’ on the project site (54’ + 12’).
The second of the two concessions requested by the project under the State Density Bonus
law is an additional 7’ height bonus, which increases the building height to a maximum 73’
from finished grade to the top of the roof. The documentation within the submitted
financial pro forma also identifies that the additional 7’ height bonus is required to make
the project financially feasible. The City’s economist consultant has again concluded the
requested additional 7’ height bonus is necessary to make the project financially feasible.
The project also requests a waiver of the front setback requirement along the Third St.
frontage under the State Density Bonsu law. The documentation within the submitted
financial pro forma also identifies that the waiver of the front setback is required to make
the project financially feasible. The City’s economist consultant has again concluded the
requested setback waiver is necessary to make the project financially feasible.
The project proposes 12,555 sq. ft. (46%) of site landscaping, where a minimum 10%
(2,737 sq. ft.) is required. New street trees are proposed along all three building frontages
on the ground-floor. A combined 4,528 sq. ft. of landscaped area is proposed on the
podium (2nd floor)-level between a central courtyard and common outdoor deck areas along
the front (Third St. elevation) and rear (adjacent to the paint store located at 770 Second
St.) building elevations. A landscaped rooftop amenities area, 5,317 sq. ft. in size, is also
proposed. In addition, the project proposes raised Corten steel planters along the grou nd-
floor of the Third St. frontage. Details on specific landscaping species are not provided at
this time.
The project proposes 969 sq. ft. of ground-level commercial space located at the northeast
corner of the project site, at the corner of Third St and Tamalpais Ave. This represents
0.035 FAR where a maximum 1.5 FAR or 41,050.5 sq. ft. of nonresidential develop is
allowed on the project site in addition to the residential density.
Useable outdoor area is encouraged, though not required, in residential development as part
of a mixed-use project. The project proposes 2,738 combined sq. ft. of private balconies to
select residential units on the upper floors (floor 2 through 6). The project also proposes
4,353 combined sq. ft. of common outdoor area on the podium (2nd floor) level, within a
central landscaped courtyard and along the front and rear elevations. The project proposes
an additional 5,317 sq. ft. of common outdoor area through a landscaped roof deck.
Exhibit 4
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAEL ZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 14)
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table
Exhibit: 4-4
Overall, the project proposes 12,408 sq. ft. of private and common outdoor recreational
area or an average of 103.4 sq. ft. of recreational area per unit.
CHAPTER 16 – SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
14.16.030 - Affordable Housing Requirement. Any new residential and
mixed-use development projects with 21 or more housing units shall
provide a minimum 20% ‘affordability’. Residential ‘ownership’ projects
shall provide a minimum 50% of the required affordable units at the low-
income household level and the remainder at the moderate-income
household levels. By meeting specific affordability requirements at the low-
income household level, a project is eligible for a State Density bonus of up
to 35% and three (3) concessions.
Consistent
Under both the City’s General Plan (Land Use Policy LU -23; Land Use Map and
Categories) and Zoning Ordinance (Sections 14.05.032; Property Development Standards;
2/3 MUE District), the maximum allowable density on the site is 45 units, based on the
27,367 sq. ft. of combined lot area between the two adjacent parcels within the project site.
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, p rovide 20% of the
total units at ‘below market rates’ (BMR units). Based on the 20% “affordability”
requirement, the project would be required to provide nine (9) BMR units. For ‘rental’
units, a minimum of 50% of the required BMR units shall be made affor dable to very low-
income households at <50% of the median County income, with the remainder affordable
to low-income households equal to 51-80% of the median County income level.
At the request of the Planning Commission during the study session to provide more
affordability to off-set the proposed additional density, the project has voluntarily increased
the proposed affordability, from nine (9) required BMR units (5 units at very low-income
household levels and 4 units at low-income household levels) to 12 BMR units (5 units at
very low-income household levels and 4 units at low-income household levels plus 3 BMR
units at the moderate-income household levels for a fixed 10-year term). By meeting the
minimum affordable housing requirement, the project is eligible to request a density bonus
of up to a maximum of 35%, or 16 additional market -rate units, and up to two (2)
concessions/incentives under the State Density Bonus law. The project is requesting two
(2) concessions, an additional density bonus and a height bonus beyond the height bonus
allowed under the Zoning Ordinance. In addition, the project requests a front setback (5’)
waiver under the State Density Bonus law.
Exhibit 4
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAEL ZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 14)
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table
Exhibit: 4-5
14.16.150 – Floor Area Ratios.
A. General.
1. The intensity and density of development in nonresidential and
mixed-use districts is identified by floor area ratio (FAR) and by
the number of units allowed per one thousand (1,000) square feet
of lot area for the location and zoning district in which a site is
located. The FAR is the total buildin g square footage (gross floor
area) divided by the lot area excluding public streets. Total
building square footage excludes parking areas or garages
(covered and uncovered), residential components of a mixed use
project, hotels, and non -leasable covered atriums. Floor area for
permanent child care facilities in nonresidential structures may be
excluded in the FAR, subject to the provisions of Chapter 14.22,
Use Permits.
2. See subsection G, floor area ratio limit maps for FAR limits in
non-residential zoning districts. The maximum allowable FAR is
not guaranteed and shall be determined by the following factors:
site constraints, infrastructur e capacity, hazardous conditions and
design policies.
B. Mixed-Use Development.
1. Commercial or Office with Residential. FAR limits apply only to
the non-residential component of a development. The number of
residential units allowed on a lot is base d on the minimum lot
area required per dwelling unit standard for the zoning district .
-----------
G. Floor Area Ratio Limit Standards and Maps.
1. For lots in the downtown area, the following apply:
a. FARs may be transferred from one portion to another of a parcel
split by FAR designations if the transfer results in a scale
compatible with surrounding development, as permitted
in Section 14.16.340, Transfer of density on -site.
b. A one-time increase in FAR up to ten percent (10%) of the
building or seven hundred fifty (750) square feet, whichever is
Consistent
The maximum nonresidential development allowable on the project site is 1.5 FAR (floor
area ratio) or 41,505.5 sq. ft. based on 27,367 sq. ft. of combined lot area. The project
proposes 969 sq. ft. of ground level nonresidential development or commercial space on
the project site.
Exhibit 4
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAEL ZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 14)
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table
Exhibit: 4-6
larger, shall be allowed for expansion of commercial and office
structures if consistent with the provisions of this title, consistent
with the provisions of Chapter 14.22, Use Permits. A traffic
study may be required for a FAR increase for buildings on Fifth
or Mission Avenues.
2. A higher FAR may be permitted at the intersection of Andersen
Drive, Highway 101 and Francisco Blvd. West, if the proposed
development would substantially upgrade the area and in clude
bulk and region-serving specialty retail and/or hotel uses, subject
to a use permit (Chapter 14.22).
14.16.190 – Height Bonus.
A. Downtown Height Bonuses. A height bonus may be granted by a use
permit approved by the planning commission in the following
downtown zoning districts. No more than one height bonus may be
granted for a project.
-----------
3. In the Second/Third mixed use east district, a twelve -foot (12′)
height bonus for any of the following:
a. Affordable housing, consistent with Section
14.16.030 (Affordable housing);
b. Public parking, providing it is consistent with the downtown
design guidelines;
c. Skywalks over Second or Third Streets, with the approval of the
traffic engineer, and the recommendation of the design review
board;
d. Mid-block passageways between Fourth Street and parking lots
on Third Street, with the recommendation of the design review
board that the design is attractive and safe.
Consistent with conditions
By meeting the City’s affordable housing requirement (20% or 9 BMR units), the project is
allowed an automatic height bonus of 12’ under the Zoning Ordinance, increasing the
maximum height to 66’ on the project site (54’ + 12’). The project also requests an
additional 7’ height bonus under the State Density Bonus law as a concession for meeting
its affordable housing requirement, increasing the maximum overall height proposed to 73’
from finished grade to the roof deck.
14.16.227 – Light and Glare.
Colors, materials and lighting shall be designed to avoid creating undue off-
site light and glare impacts. New or amended building or site colors,
materials and lighting shall comply with the following standards, subject to
review and recommendation by the police department, public works
Consistent with conditions
The project proposes exterior lighting along all three (3) street fronts. LED sconce -type
light fixtures are proposed to provide accent lighting for brick pillars at ground level along
all three street frontages. Cut sheets for the light fixtures indicate these would use a 10-watt
/ 3,000 kelvin light source which would create a ‘warm’ light appearance. The light fixtures
Exhibit 4
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAEL ZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 14)
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table
Exhibit: 4-7
department, and community development department:
A. Glossy finishes and reflective glass such as glazed or mirrored
surfaces are discouraged and prohibited where it would create an
adverse impact on pedestrian or automotive traffic or on adjacent
structures; particularly within the downtown environs and in
commercial, industrial and hillside areas.
B. Lighting fixtures shall be appropriately designed and/or shielded
to conceal light sources from view off-site and avoid spillover
onto adjacent properties.
C. The foot-candle intensity of lighting should be the minimum
amount necessary to provide a sense of security at building
entryways, walkways and parking lots. In general terms,
acceptable lighting levels would provide one (1) foot-candle
ground level overlap at doorways, one-half (½) foot-candle
overlap at walkways and parking lots, and fall below one (1)
foot-candle at the property line.
D. Lighting shall be reviewed for compatibility with on-site and off-
sight light sources. This shall include review of lighting
intensity, overlap and type of illumination (e.g., high-pressure
sodium, LED, etc.). This may include a review by the city to
assure that lighting installed on private property would not cause
conflicts with public street lighting.
E. Installation of new lighting fixtures or changes in lighting
intensity on mixed use and non-residential properties shall be
subject to environmental and design review permit review as
required by Chapter 14.25 (Design Review).
F. Maximum wattage of lamps shall be specified on the plans
submitted for electrical permits.
G. All new lighting shall be subject to a 90-day post installation
inspection to allow for adjustment and assure compliance with
this section.
are proposed to be bronze finished with vertical slats which would match the perforated
vertical slat design of the balcony railing and sunshade detailing. A condition of approval
would be included establishing a 90-day lighting review period at final
inspection/occupancy where adjustments in lighting may be required by staff to reduce off -
site glare, if necessary.
14.16.230 – Lot Consolidation.
Where a development project is constructed on more than one adjoining
Consistent with conditions
The project proposes to construct a mixed-use building over two (2) adjacent Downtown
Exhibit 4
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAEL ZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 14)
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table
Exhibit: 4-8
lot, the owner or owners of such lots must merge such lots into a single lot
when the building is proposed to cross the property line of the adjoin ing
lots. The lots shall be merged prior to issuance of a building permit.
lots. Prior to building permit issuance, the project will need to merge or consolidate the lots
into one common parcel by extinguishing the common property line currently separating
the lots. A plat map with closure calculations shall be submitted to Planning for review and
approval by the Land Development Engineer in the Department of Public Works prior to
approval by the Community Development Director and recordation with Marin County by
the Land Development Engineer.
14.16.243 – Mechanical Equipment Screening.
Equipment placed on the rooftop of a building or in an ex terior yard area
shall be adequately screened from public view. See Chapter 14.16 for
exclusions to maximum height requirements and Chapter 14.25 for design
review requirements.
Consistent
The project design proposes a central courtyard on the podium (2nd floor) level which
extends to roof. Rooftop mechanical equipment, including a photovoltaic system/solar
array, is proposed to be separated from the 5,317 sq. ft of landscaped common outdoor area
also on the roof deck by a 5-6’-tall screening wall. The 73’ building height proposed by the
project, together with the height of the rooftop screening wall, would adequately mitigate
any public views of the rooftop mechanical equipment.
14.16.260 - Noise Standards
A. Residential Development. The following standards apply to residential
development:
-----------
3. In high density and downtown residential districts residential
interior standards shall be met, and common usable outdoor areas
shall be designed to minimize noise impacts. Where possible, a 60
dBA (Ldn) standard shall be applied to usable outdoor areas
4. Interior noise standards for new single -family residential and
residential health care development shall be 40 dBA (Ldn) for
bedrooms and 45 dBA (Ldn) for other rooms. New hotels and
motels shall meet a 45 dBA (Ldn) standard. For new multifamily
development, hotels and motels, interior noise standards shall be
described by State Administrative Code standards, Title 25, Part 2.
-----------
6. Post-construction monitoring and approval by an acoustical
engineer shall be required in residential development near high
noise sources to ensure that city standards have been met.
Consistent with conditions
noise impacts to the project would be ‘conditional acceptable’ and recommended the
following noise reduction and insulation features be included in the project design: 1) The
proposed solid 4’-tall parapet sound wall increase in height to 6’ around the roof deck; 2)
sound-rated windows and specifically constructed exterior wall assemblies will be required
at the time of building permit submittal (i.e., most windows will require an STC (Sound
Transmission Class) 36 rating, some corner units will require windows with higher ratings,
balcony doors will need to be sound-rated, and some wall assemblies with siding will
require additional layers of gypsum); 3) All construction equipment shall operate with
maintained mufflers and other state required noise attenuation devices; 4) Property owners
and occupants within a 250 ft. radius of the project site shall receive notice 15 days prior
commencement of construction of each phase, regarding the construction schedule of the
project, subject to review and approval by Planning staff. These notices shall indicate dates
and duration of construction activities and provide a contact name and telephone number to
inquire about the construction schedule and register complaints;5) The project shall
designate a Noise Disturbance Coordinator (NDC) to be present on -site during all grading
and construction activities, who name and contact details shall be included in all notices.
The NDC shall be responsible for responding to all complaints about grading and
construction noise. When a compliant is received, the NDC shall notify Planning staff
within 24-hours of the complaint, determine the cause of the complaint and implement
reasonable measures to resolve the complaint, as deemed acceptable by Planning staff. In
Exhibit 4
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAEL ZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 14)
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table
Exhibit: 4-9
addition, the name and contact information of the NDC shall be posted on the site and
legible from a distance of 50 ft.; 6) Noise reduction methods shall be utilized during all
grading and construction activities where feasible, including shutting off idling equipment,
installing temporary acoustic barriers around stationary construction noise sources,
maximizing the distance between construction equipment staging areas and occupied
residential areas, and electric air compressors and similar power tools; 7) Grading and
construction haul truck routes shall be designated to avoid sensitive receptors, such as
residences and convalescent homes, to the greatest extent feasible; and 8) During
construction activities, stationary construction equipment shall be located such that emitted
noise is directed away from sensitive receptors. These recommendations by the Noise
Study will be incorporated as conditions of approval.
14.16.295- Sight Distance.
Fencing, vegetation and improvements shall be established and
maintained only in a manner that does not reduce visibility for the safe
ingress and egress of vehicles or pede strians within a required vision
triangle, e.g., fifteen feet (15') from the curb return at any intersection or
driveway, or as determined by the director of public works. In general,
fencing and improvements or vegetation located within the established
vision triangle (as determined below) shall not exceed a height of three
feet (3') as measured above the adjacent street pavement. The vision
triangle shall be kept free of any visual obstruction between a height of
three feet (3') to eight feet (8') above t he street grade elevation.
Consistent.
The project proposes two (2) 20’-wide, two-way, driveways; one along the Tamalpais Ave.
frontage and the other along the Lincoln Ave. frontage. The City’s Land Development
Engineer reviewed the sight distance provided by the project design and has determined it
adequate to provide safe ingress and egress of vehicles and pedestrians.
14.16.70- Water – Efficient Landscape
All new development projects providing 500 sq. ft. or greater of
landscaping shall be reviewed and obtain approval by the Marin Municipal
Water District (MMWD) prior to building permit issuance. MMWD shall
review all project landscaping, irrigation and grading plans for compliance
with the most recently adopted MMWD water-conservation ordinance.
Consistent with conditions.
The project proposes 12,555 sq. ft. (46%) of site landscaping, where a minimum 10%
(2,737 sq. ft.) is required. New street trees are proposed along all three building frontages
on the ground-floor. A combined 4,528 sq. ft. of landscaped area is proposed on the
podium (2nd floor)-level between a central courtyard and common outdoor deck areas along
the front (Third St. elevation) and rear (adjacent to the paint store located at 770 Second
St.) building elevations. A landscaped rooftop amenities area, 5,317 sq. ft. in size, is also
proposed. In addition, the project proposes raised Corten steel planters along the ground -
floor of the Third St. frontage. Details on specific landscaping species are not provided at
this time. Prior to building permit issuance, the project will be required to have the
landscape and irrigation plans reviewed and approved by MMWD to comply with
MMWD’s most recent water-efficiency requirements. A condition of approval would be
Exhibit 4
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAEL ZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 14)
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table
Exhibit: 4-10
included requiring submittal of documentation from MMWD review and approval of the
project’s landscape details prior to building permit issuance.
CHAPTER 17 – PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
14.17.100 – Residential Uses in Commercial Districts
Applicability. Performance standards for residential uses in commercial
districts shall be applied through an administrative use permit in the 4SRC,
HO, 2/3 MUE and MUW, CSMU, WEV, GC, FBWC, C/O, and M districts
or through a use permit in the NC district.
Standards:
1. Location. In the 4SRC and WEV districts, residential units may be
located above the ground floor, and on rear portions of the ground.
Location of residential units in the 2/3 MUE and MUW, GC,
FBWC, HO, C/O, CSMU, M and NC districts shall be determined
through project review.
2. .Access. Residential units shall have a separate and secured
entrance and exit.
3. Parking. Residential parking shall comply with Chapter 14.18,
Parking Standards, of this title.
4. .Noise. Residential units shall meet the residential noise
standards in Section 14.16.260, Noise standards, of this title.
5. Lighting. All exterior lighting shall be sufficient to establish a
sense of well-being to the pedestrian and one that is sufficient to
facilitate recognition of persons at a reasonable distance. Type
and placement of lighting shall be to the satisfaction of the police
department. The minimum of one foot-candle at ground level
shall be provided in all exterior doorways and vehicle parking
areas.
6. Refuse Storage and Location. An adequate refuse storage area
shall be provided for the residential use.
7. Location of new residential units shall consider existing
surrounding uses in order to minimize impacts from existing
Consistent with conditions
The project site is located with the 2/3 MUE District zone, a Downtown commercial
zoning district. The project would comply with the standards to allow residential uses in a
commercial district, subject to recommendations to mitigate potential noise impacts as
determined in the submitted Noise Study for the project.
Exhibit 4
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAEL ZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 14)
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table
Exhibit: 4-11
uses.
CHAPTER 18 – PARKING STANDARDS
14.18.040 - Parking Requirements
A. Off-street parking shall be provided in accord with the following
chart:
• New studio units, located within the Downtown, are required to
provide 1 parking space;
• New 1-bedroom units, located within the Downtown, are required
to provide 1 parking space;
• New, 2-bedroom units, located within the Downtown, are required
to provide 1.5 parking spaces;
• No ‘guest’ parking spaces are required within the Downtown
unless the project is located within 200’ of a residential zoning
district and then will be required to provide 1 parking space per
every 5 units; and
• Commercial space, located within the Downtown, is required to
provide 1 parking space per 250-300 gross building sq. ft.,
generally.
B. Parking Modification. The parking requirement for any specific
use listed may be modified so as to provide adequate parking
which is fair, equitable, logical and consistent with the intent of
this chapter. Such modification may also include reduction in
parking ratios for businesses in the downtown zoning districts
that allow the use of private parking facilities to be used for
public parking during evening or weekend hours. Parking
modifications shall require an application for a use permit and
shall be subject to review by the community development
director and public works director, and approval by the zoning
administrator.
Consistent
The project proposes to provide 121 parking spaces on site. All parking would be on the
ground floor and that this level would have a taller plate height (22 ft tall) to accommodate
the mechanical parking lifts. 109 of the 121 spaces would be provided through mechanical
jigsaw parking platforms and the remaining 12 spaces would be non-mechanical lift spaces
for electric vehicle (EV), visitor, ADA and car share
Through State Density Bonus law, projects that are within ½ mile of a transit facility are
required to provide 0.5 parking space/bedroom. In this case, the project includes 163
bedrooms, therefore 81.5 (82) parking spaces would be required to meet the residential
parking requirement. Since the project site is located outside the Downtown Parking
District, the project is required to provide 3-4 parking spaces to meet the nonresidential
parking required. The project proposes to provide 121 parking space, which is 35-36 spaces
in excess of the required parking. The reduced parking requirement does not count as a
concession or waiver, under State Density Bonus law.
The proposed vertical stacked parking lifts are a departure from the parking facility design
envisioned by the Parking Standards of the Zoning Ordinance, which is providing parking
on a more established horizontal or side-by-side configuration. A Parking Modification
will be required, through a Use Permit, with the recommendation of the Public Works
Director and the Community Development Director, to allow mechanical parking lifts.
14.18.045 – Clean Air Vehicles.
A. Applicability. Parking spaces serving new nonresidential
buildings shall be designated for any combination of low-emitting,
Consistent with conditions
The project has been conditioned to provide a minimum of 11 clean air vehicle parking
spaces, pre-wired for electric vehicle charging stations.
Exhibit 4
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAEL ZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 14)
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table
Exhibit: 4-12
fuel-efficient, and carpool/van pool vehicles, as defined by
Section 5.102 of the California Green Building Standards Code,
California Code of Regulations, Part 11 of Title 24.
B. Number of Short-Term Spaces Required. 11 parking spaces for
clean air vehicles shall be provided for parking facilities providing
101-150 parking spaces.
C. Parking Stall Marking. The following characters shall be painted,
using the same paint for stall striping, such that the lower edge of
the last word aligns with the end of the stall striping and is visible
beneath a parked vehicle: "CLEAN AIR VEHICLE”.
D. Prewiring for Electric Vehicle Charging Stations. In new or
substantially renovated parking facilities of twenty -five (25) or
more spaces electrical conduit capable of supporting suitable
wiring for an electric vehicle charging station shall be installed
between an electrical service panel and an area of clean air vehicle
parking spaces as required by this section. The conduit shall be
capped and labeled for potential future use.
14.18.050 –Off-Street Loading and Unloading.
The minimum off-street loading and unloading space required for specific
uses shall be as follows:
A. Retail and service establishments: one off -street loading and
unloading space with minimum dimensions of ten feet (10′) in
width by thirty-five feet (35′) in length, with a fourteen-foot (14′)
height clearance.
-----------
C. Each loading area shall have adequate driveways, turning and
maneuvering areas for access and usability, and shall at all times
have access to a public street or alley.
-----------.
E. Off-street loading and unloading spaces shall be adequately
screened from view from public rights -of-way to the satisfaction
of the planning director.
Consistent
The proposed design of the parking garage includes a loading zone which c omplies with
the applicable standards for loading and unloading spaces.
14.18.090 –Bicycle Parking. Consistent
Exhibit 4
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAEL ZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 14)
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table
Exhibit: 4-13
A. Applicability. Bicycle parking shall be required for all new
nonresidential buildings and in major renovations of
nonresidential buildings having thir ty (30) or more parking
spaces, and for all public/quasi -public uses.
B. Number of Short-Term Spaces Required.
1. Commercial, office, industrial, and multi -family residential uses:
five percent (5%) of the requirement for automobile parking
spaces, with a minimum of one two -bike capacity rack.
2. Public/quasi-public uses: as determined by parking study, or as
specified by use permit.
3. Exempt uses: animal sales and service; motor vehicle sales and
services; building materials and supplies (large -item); catering
establishments; funeral and interment services; temporary uses;
recycling facilities; other uses as determined by the planning
director.
C. Number of Long-Term Spaces Required.
1. For nonresidential buildings with over ten (10) tenant -occupants:
Five percent (5%) of the requirement for automobile parking
spaces, with a minimum of one space.
D. Reduction of Vehicle Parking. Properties that provide bicycle
parking in excess of the bicycle parking spaces identified in
Section 14.18.090.B. and/or C. may qualify for a reduction to the
overall vehicle parking requirements subject to the approval of a
use permit for parking modification.
E. Design.
1. Short-Term Parking: Bike racks shall be provided with each
bicycle parking space. The rack shall consist of a stationary
object to which the user can lock the bike.
2. Long-Term Parking: Acceptable parking facilities include:
a. Covered, lockable enclosures with permanently anchored racks
for bicycles,
b. Lockable bicycle room with permane ntly anchored racks, or
c. Lockable, permanently anchored bicycle lockers.
The project proposes 120 residential units above a small, 969 sq. ft. ground floor
commercial space. Since bicycle parking is required for only the nonresidential porti on of
the project, the minimum short-term bicycle parking is required or one (1) two-bike
capacity rack. The project proposes eight (8) two-bike capacity racks evenly distributed
along both the Third St. and Tamalpais Ave, frontages, adjacent to the new street trees and
grates. The project also proposes to provide a 612 sq. ft. “Bike lounge” on the ground level,
adjacent to the commercial space, capable of providing secured long-term parking for up to
24 bicycles for residents and the public.
Exhibit 4
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAEL ZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 14)
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table
Exhibit: 4-14
3. Parking facilities shall support bicycles in a stable position.
4. The facilities shall provide at least an eighteen inch (18″)
clearance from the centerline of adjacent bi cycles on the left and
right, and at least ten inches (10″) to walls or other obstructions.
5. An aisle or other space shall be provided to bicycles to enter and
leave the facility. This aisle shall have a width of at least five
feet (5′) to the front or rear of a standard six-foot (6′) bicycle
parked in a facility.
6. Bicycle parking should be situated at least as conveniently to
building entrances as the most convenient car parking area, but a
minimum distance of one hundred feet (100′) of a visitors'
entrance. Bicycle and auto parking areas shall be separated by a
physical barrier or sufficient distance to protect parked bicycles
from damage by cars.
7. Bicycle parking facilities should be located in highly visible,
well-lit areas to minimize theft and vandalism.
8. Overhead coverage or rain shelters for bicycle parking facilities
are encouraged.
9. The planning director (or the planning director's designated
appointee) shall have the authority to review the design of all
bicycle parking faciliti es required by this title with respect to
safety, security and convenienc e.
14.18.100 –Parking Space Dimensions
A. Standard size parking spaces shall be nine feet (9') by nineteen feet
(19') in dimension, except that in downtown, the standard size parking
space shall be eight and one -half feet (8.5') by eighteen feet (18') in
dimensions;
B. Compact parking spaces shall be eight feet (8′) by sixteen feet (16′) in
dimensions.:
Consistent
All on-site parking spaces are designed to comply with the minimum parking space
dimensions for ‘standard’ and ‘compact’ Downtown parking spaces.
14.18.110 –Compact Spaces – Allowable Percentage
A. Allowable Percentage. A maximum thirty percent (30%) of the
required parking spaces may be compact spaces for facilities exceeding
Consistent
The project proposes 121 parking spaces of which 36 parking spaces are allowed to meet
reduced ‘compact’ space dimensions. The project proposes three (3) parking spaces which
Exhibit 4
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAEL ZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 14)
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table
Exhibit: 4-15
five (5) space s;
B. Spaces Labeled. Compact spaces shall be labeled in p arking
facilities as compact spaces to the satisfaction of the city traffic
engineer;
C. Distribution. Compact spaces should be distributed throughout the
parking lot to the extent feasible.
will meet reduced ‘compact’ parking space dimensions.
14.18.130 - Parking Facility Dimensions and Design
A. Minimum Standards.
• 90O, two-way Downtown parking spaces require minimum dimensions
to be 8.5’ wide by 18’ deep with a minimum backup aisle between the
parking spaces of 26’.
-----------
B. Parking Stall Access.
• Use of a required parking space shall not require more than two (2)
vehicle maneuvers. At the end of a parking facility with four (4) or
more parking spaces, an aisle or driveway providing access to the end
parking space shall extend at least two feet (2′) beyond the required
width of the parking space in order to provide adequate on-site area for
turnaround purposes
Consistent
The proposed parking garage design layouts for the new residential buildings have been
reviewed by the City Engineer and found to be consistent with all applicable design
standards under Section 14.18.130 of the Zoning Ordinance.
14.18.140 - Access to Public Right-of-Way
Driveway Widths. The minimum curb cut for driveways at the face of the
curb, for residential uses serving 25 or more spaces, shall have a minimum
inside depressed width of 24’.
Consistent
The project proposes two (2), two-way driveways; one along the Tamalpais Ave. frontage
and the other along the Lincoln Ave. frontage. Current ‘vision’ documents (Downtown San
Rafael Vision, San Rafael Downtown Design Guidelines, Downtown San Rafael Station
Area Plan and the San Rafael Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan; 2018 Update) all
encourage improving Tamalpais Ave., which is a ‘gateway’ to the Downtown with
excellent visibility from all transportation modes (pedestrian, bicycle and transit, as a
‘pedestrian street’ by minimizing driveway cuts and driveway widths. The proposed
driveway widths to the parking garage has been reviewed and is supported by the City
Engineer.
CHAPTER 22 – USE PERMITS
Exhibit 4
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAEL ZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 14)
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table
Exhibit: 4-16
14.22.080 – Findings.
The following findings must be made to approve a Use Permit:
A. Proposed use is in accord with the general plan, the objectives of the
zoning ordinance and the purposes of the district in which the site is
located;
B. Proposed use will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or
welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the
vicinity, or to the general welfare of the City; and
C. Proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the
Zoning Ordinance.
Consistent
A. The proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Zoning
Ordinance, and the purposes of the Second/Third Mixed Use East (2/3 MUE) District
in which the project site is located in that:
1. As documented in the General Plan 2020 Consistency Table attached to the staff
report (Exhibit 3) to the Planning Commission, the project will be consistent with
all pertinent General Plan policies, subject to requested concessions for additional
density and building height under the State Density Bonus law for which the
project is eligible after meeting its affordable housing requirement. The project
would be consistent, or conditionally consistent, with the following General Plan
policies:
• Land Use Policies LU-2 (Development Timing), LU-8 (Density of Residential
Development), LU-9 (Intensity of Nonresidential Development), LU-12
(Building Heights). LU-13 (Height Bonuses), LU-14 (Land Use
Compatibility), LU-18 (Lot Consolidation), and LU-23 (Land Use Map and
Categories);
• Housing Policies H-1 (Housing Distribution), H-2 (Design That Fits into the
Neighborhood Context), H-3 (Public Information and Participation), H-14
(Adequate Sites), H-15 (Infill Near Transit), and H-18 (Inclusionary
Housing);
• Neighborhood Policies NH-3 (Housing Mix), NH-15 (Downtown Vision),
NH-16 (Economic Success), NH-17 (Competing Concerns), NH-22 (Housing
Downtown), NH-25 (Pedestrian Comfort and Safety), NH-29 (Downtown
Design), NH-30 (Pedestrian Environments), NH-31 (Ground Floor Designed
for Pedestrians) and NH-37 (Hetherton Office District Design
Considerations);
• Community Design Policies CD-1 (City Image), CD-2 (Neighborhood
Identity), CD-3 (Neighborhoods), CD-5 (Views), CD-7 (Downtown and
Marin Civic Center), CD-8 (Gateways), CD-11 (Multifamily Design
Guidelines), CD-14 (Recreational Areas), CD-15 (Participation in Project
Review), CD-18 (Landscaping) and CD-19 (Lighting);
• Circulation Policies C-5 (Traffic Level of Service Standards), C-7
(Circulation Improvement Funding) C-26 (Bicycle Plan Implementation) and
C-27 (Pedestrian Plan Implementation);
• Infrastructure Policy I-2 (Adequacy of City Infrastructure and Services);
Exhibit 4
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAEL ZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 14)
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table
Exhibit: 4-17
• Sustainability Policies SU-5d (Reduce Use of Nonrenewable Resources;
Water Efficiency Programs) and SU-7 (New and Existing Trees);
• Culture and Arts Policy CA-15 (Protection of Archaeological Resources)
• Park and Recreation Policy PR-10 (Onsite Recreation Facilities) and PR-24
(Contributions by Rental Residential);
• Safety Policies S-1 (Location of Future Development), S-4 (Geotechnical
Review), S-6 (Seismic Safety of New Buildings), S-17 (Flood Protection of
New Development), S-25 (Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)
Requirements) and S-32 (Safety Review of Development Projects); and
• Air and Water Quality Policies AW-1 (State and Federal Standards), AW-7
(Local, State and Federal Standards) and AW-8 (Reduce Pollution from
Urban Runoff).
In weighing all of the applicable policies, the project is, generally, consistent with
the General Plan. The project would redevelop two (2) Downtown in-fill lots, one
of which (723 Third St/898 Lincoln Ave.) is listed as both Housing Opportunity
Sites and Underutilized Mixed-Use Site in Appendix B of the General Plan. The
project would construct 120 new residential ‘rental’ units in the Downtown,
whose residents and guests would help activate Tamalpais Ave., identified as a
‘gateway’ to Downtown, supporting the City’s long-term goal of creating ‘alive
after 5’ evening and weekend activity in the Downtown, and provide economic
opportunities to Downtown businesses, particularly restaurants. These new units
would help meet the City’s RHNA (Regional Housing Needs Allocation) target of
providing 1,007 additional housing units in the City by 2023. A total of nine (9) of
these housing units would be required to be deed-restricted as ‘affordable’
housing; five (5) of these housing units would be deed-restricted for rent to very
low-income households and four (4) units deed-restricted for rent to low-income
households. As a response to the Planning Commission study session requesting
the project provide greater affordability to off-set the proposed additional density
bonus, three (3) additional affordable units at the moderate -income household
level would be voluntarily proposed for a fixed 10 -year term. These new below
market rate or BMR units would contribute to the City’s need to provide 240 new
very low-income housing units and 120 new low-income housing units by 2023.
The project would be consistent with several adopted ‘vision’ documents,
including the Downtown Vision, the Downtown Design Guidelines and the
Exhibit 4
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAEL ZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 14)
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table
Exhibit: 4-18
Downtown San Rafael Station Area Plan, in terms of use, height, scale, stepbacks,
and landscaping.
2. As documented in the Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table attached to the staff
report to the Planning Commission, the proposed project will be consistent with
the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance, which is to promote and protect the public
health safety, peace, comfort and general welfare, given that;
i. The project will implement and promote the goals and policies of the San
Rafael General Plan 2020, as identified in Finding A1 above;
ii. The project has been reviewed by Community Development Department,
other appropriate City Departments and non-City agencies, as well as the
City’s Design Review Board and the Planning Commission as a conceptual
project, and conditions have been created or the project has been changed,
revised or modified to reduce or negate potential impacts caused by
inappropriate location, use or design of the building and improvements;
iii. The project would promote housing development to meet the housing needs
of current and future residents, including affordable housing, and to meet the
City’s RHNA target goals, as identified in Finding A1 above ;
iv. The project has coordinated the service demands with the capabilities of
existing street, utilities and public services. All service providers, including
PG&E, Marin Sanitary Service, Marin Municipal Water District, San Rafael
Sanitation District, Central Marin Sanitation Agency, and the City Engineer,
have review the project and indicated that adequate infrastructure capacity
exists for the project
3. As documented in the Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table attached to the staff
report to the Planning Commission, the proposed project would be consistent with
the purposes of both the 2/3 MUE Districts, given that:
i. The project will help promote Downtown as a viable urban center with a
mixture of civic, social, entertainment, cultural and residential uses by
redeveloping the project site with a mixed -use building with 120 new
residential apartment units above 121 garage parking spaces and a 969 sq. ft.
commercial space;
Exhibit 4
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAEL ZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 14)
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table
Exhibit: 4-19
ii. The project will provide housing opportunities by proposing housing in
mixed-use districts which will help meet the housing needs of current and
future residents, including affordable housing, and to meet the City’s RHNA
target goals, as identified in Finding A1 above;
iii. The project will help activate the pedestrian character of Tamalpais Ave.,
identified as a ‘gateway’ to Downtown with both housing and commercial
space in the Downtown, adjacent to the Downtown SMART station and in
close proximity to the relocated Bettini Transit Center (whose exact future
location is unknown at this time); and
iv. The project will help promote Tamalpais Ave. as a ‘pedestrian street’ by
minimizing driveway cuts and driveway widths, widening the sidewalk and
installing street trees and raised Corten steel landscaped planters along all
three (3) street frontages.
B. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or
materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity, given that: 1) The
project has been referred to, and reviewed by, the appropriate City departments, non-
City agencies, the appropriate surrounding neighbo rhood group (Downtown Business
Improvement District, Federation of San Rafael Neighborhoods, Gerstle Park
Neighborhood Assoc., Montecito Area Residents Assoc., Bret Harte Community Assn.
and Lincoln-San Rafael Hill Neighborhood Assoc.) and both the Design Rreview
Board and Planning Commission during separate conceptual design review meetings,
the Planning Commission study session, the Board’s review of the forma project and
this Planning Commission hearing; and 2) Revisons, modifications or changes to the
project have occurred as a result of comments or recommendations provided by these
departments, neighborbhood groups and hearing bodies, or conditions of approval
have been ncluded to mitigate any potential negative impacts anticipated to be
generated by the proposed project; and
C. The proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning
Ordinance, as documented in the Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table attached to the
staff report (Exhibit 4) to the Planning Commission.
Exhibit 4
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAEL ZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 14)
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table
Exhibit: 4-20
CHAPTER 25 – ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN REVIEW
PERMIT
14.25.010 – Specific Purposes
Environmental and design review implements general plan policies
concerning the environment and design by guiding the location, functions
and appearance of development. The key environ mental and design goal
of the city is to respect and protect the natural environment and assure that
development is harmoniously integrated with the existing qualities of the
city. The purposes of environmental and design review are t o:
A. First and foremost, maintain a proper balance between development
and the natural environment;
B. Ensure that the location, design and materials and colors of
development blends with and enhances the natural setting s;
C. Maintain and improve the quality of, and relationship betwe en,
development and the surrounding area to contribute to the
attractiveness of the city;
D. Preserve balance and harmony within neighborhoods .
E. Promote design excellence by encouraging creative design and the
innovative use of materials and methods and techni ques; and
F. Preserve and enhance views from other buildings and public property
Consistent
The project proposes a contemporary design, similar to the nearby BioMarin campus
buildings, though with unique façade treatments (brick with Corten steel planters at the
ground level and a mixture of stucco and vertical and horizontal fiber cement board siding
at the upper levels), greater articulation, stepping back the upper stories and a more
‘residential’ window proportion. The proposed 6-story scale was reviewed by both the
Board and the Commission during conceptual design review, the Commission again during
study session review and the Board again during formal project review and supported. The
project design has been revised to provide equal, high -quality design attention to all four
building elevations, including the rear elevation which is shared with 770 Second St. Better
vertical and horizontal articulation and stepbacks of upper stories have been incorporated
into the revised project design. In addition, previously proposed upper-story projections or
encroachments over the sidewalk have been eliminated. Extensive landscaping in the form
of street trees and Corten steel raise planter along all three street fronts is proposed to help
create a pedestrian scale. The project proposes to orient pedestrian activity through the
lobby area both through the main entry on Third St and at the northwest corner of Third
St./Lincoln Ave.
Photo simulations were created by the applicant and submitted within the project plans,
which indicate minor view impacts of the surrounding hillsides west and north of the
project site. These potential view impacts would be similar to those resulting from
development of the adjacent BioMarin campus.
14.25.050 - Review Criteria
Projects must meet the following design review criteria:
• Consistency with General Plan design polices.
• Consistency with Specific Plans
• Design criteria must meet the objectives of Chapter 25 (Design
Review), which include ensuring that the design blends with the natural
setting, maintains and improves the quality of and relationship between
the development and the surrounding area, preserve the balance and
Consistent
Overall, the project would be consistent with all applicable San Rafael General Plan 2020
policies. The project site is a choice housing site due to its close proximity to the U.S.
Hwy. 101 corridor, the Downtown, the Downtown SMART station and the Bettini Transit
Center (whose future specific location is still unknown at this time). The amount of
residential density and building height are within the General Plan limits (Land Use
Policies LU-8 and LU-12/LU-13), subject to requested density bonus and height bonus
concessions/incentives under the State Density Bonus law. The City supports the
development of housing, at all levels, to help meet the needs of all San Rafael residents.
Exhibit 4
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAEL ZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 14)
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table
Exhibit: 4-21
harmony within a neighborhood, promotes excellence in design, and
preserves and enhances views.
• Site design is harmonious amongst structures within the development
and existing development in the vicinity, natural site features should be
protected and preserved, safe access and adequate parking should be
provided, drainage should be designed to be ensure proper surface
drainage
The project would also help the City meet its RHNA (Regional Housing Needs Allocation)
requirements by providing a total of 12 affordable housing or BMR units (9 required BMR
units, including 5 at very low-income levels and 4 at low-income levels, plus an additional
3 voluntary BMR units at moderate-income household level for a fixe 10-year period;
Housing Policy H-18).
The scale and quality of the existing development located south of the core Downtown
(Fourth St.) and near U.S Highway 101 is changing, primarily due to the ongoing
development of the BioMarin campus. Low profile (1- and 2-story) development is
being replaced with much taller (5- and 6-story) buildings. Determining the
predominant design character is a little more difficult. Structures within the adjacent
BioMarin campus are integrated with a cohesive architectural design with coordinated
façade treatments. The project proposes a similar contemporary design though with
unique façade treatments (brick with Corten steel planters at the ground level, stucco at
the mid-levels and a mixture of stucco and vertical and horizontal fiber cement board
siding at the upper levels), greater articulation and stepbacks of the upper stories and
more ‘residential’ window proportions.
The project design has been revised to provide equal, high -quality design attention to all
four building elevations, including the rear elevation which is shared with 770 Second St.
Better vertical and horizontal articulation and stepbacks of upper stories have been
incorporated into the revised project design. In addition, previously proposed upper-story
projections or encroachments over the sidewalk have been eliminated .
The project is required to provide 82 on-site parking spaces based on State Density Bonus
law that requires 0.5 spaces/bedroom. The project proposes to pro vide 33 more parking
spaces than required (121 provided vs 82 required) as an amenity for the residential units
This parking requirement under the State Density Bonus law excludes requiring guest
parking. The amount of proposed parking would generally equal 1 space per unit.
14.25.090 - Findings
The following findings must be made to approve a Design Review Permit
• Project design is in accord with the general plan, the objectives of the
zoning ordinance and the purposes of this chapter;
• Project design is consistent with all applicable site, architecture and
Consistent
A. The project design is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Zoning
Ordinance, and the purposes of Chapter 14.25 of the Zoning Ordinance; in that:
1. As documented in the General Plan 2020 Consistency Table (Exhibit 3), the
proposed project will implement and promote the goals and policies of the San
Exhibit 4
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAEL ZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 14)
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table
Exhibit: 4-22
landscaping design criteria and guidelines for the district in which the
site is located
• Project design minimizes adverse environmental impacts
• Project design will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or
welfare nor materially injurious to properties or improvements in the
vicinity.
Rafael General Plan 2020,
2. As documented in the Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table (Exhibit.4), the
proposed project will be consistent with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance,
which is to promote and protect the public health safety, peace, comfort and
general welfare;
3. As documented in the Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table (Exhibit.4), the
proposed project will be consistent with the purposes of Environmental and
Design Review Permits, given that; the project will promote design excellence by
encouraging creative design and the innovative use of materials and methods
and techniques.
B. The project design is consistent with all applicable site, architecture and landscaping
design criteria and guidelines for the 2/3 MUE District in which the project site is
located, given that;
1. The project design will be consistent with the maximum allowable density for the
site, which is 45 units based on 27,367 sq. ft. of total lot area, subject to requests
for automatic and discretionary density bonuses under the State Density Bonus
law after meeting mandatory affordable housing requirements;
2. The project will be consistent with the maximum height allowed for the project
site, which is 54’, subject to requests for automatic and discretionary height
bonuses under the State Density Bonus law after meeting mandatory affordable
housing requirements;
3. The project will be consistent with the minimum required yard setbacks, which is
limited to a 5’ front (Third St. frontage) setback, subject to a request for setback
waiver under the State Density Bonus law after meeting mandatory affordable
housing requirements;
4. The project will be consistent with the minimum landscaping requirement for the
project site, which is 10% or 2,737 sq. ft. (The project proposes 12,555 sq. ft. of
site landscaping);
Exhibit 4
TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAEL ZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 14)
New Mixed-Use, 120-Unit Building File #: ED18-018; UP18-008; LLA18-001
703-723 Third St. / 898 Lincoln Ave. Title: Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table
Exhibit: 4-23
5. The project will be consistent with the maximum FAR (floor area ratio) allowed
on the project site by proposing 969 sq. ft. of ground-level commercial space
located at the northeast corner of the project site, at the corner of Third St and
Tamalpais Ave. This represents 0.035 FAR where a maximum 1.5 FAR or
41,050.5 sq. ft. of nonresidential develop is allowed on the project site in addition
to the residential density;
6. The project will voluntarily provide 12,408 sq. ft. of private and common outdoor
recreational area or an average of 103.4 sq. ft. of outdoor recreational area per
unit;
7. The provisions of Marin Municipal Water District’s (MMWD) most recent water
conservation apply to the project, where MMWD approval is required prior to the
issuance of any building or grading permit; and
8. The proposed project will be consistent with review criteria for Environmental
and Design Review Permits (Chapter 14.25 of the Zoning Ordinance), by
proposing a consistent, high-quality architectural design (colors and materials;
scale; bulk and mass; fenestration and articulation) throughout the project site.
C. The project design minimizes adverse environmental impacts, given that: a California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review and clearance was prepared, based on
supporting studies submitted with the project, substantiating a Categorical Exemption
(Class 32; In-Fill Development Projects), as determined by a draft Notice of
Exemption (NOE), dated January 21, 2019.
D. The project design, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be
detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties
or improvements in the vicinity, or to the general welfare of the City, given that; the
project has been reviewed by appropriate City departments, non-City agencies, the
appropriate surrounding neighborhood groups, and the Planning Commission during a
February 26, 2019 study session, and conditions of approval have been included to
mitigate any potential negative impacts anticipated to be generated by the proposed
project.
“Good Design” Criteria for Downtown San Rafael
**Summary of Applicable Criteria**
General
• Each project should have an internally consistent design vocabulary
• Forms and materials should express he building’s design intent and context
• Design strategies such as “base middle and top” are encouraged but not the sole design
alternative
• Height and bulk can be mitigated by step backs, articulation, use of different materials
• Projections over public right of ways shall be limited to bay windows, balconies and
marquees *
• Provide architectural interest such as strategic placement of forms and applied features and
special treatment at corners especially at intersecting streets
• Concentrate premium materials at points of maximum enjoyment:
o At street level
o At building entrances
o On highly visible architectural forms and elements • Maintain pedestrian scale,
especially at the
o lower floors
• Buildings should relate to established streetscape elements such as cornice lines,
fenestration or other shared elements
• New building design may include high quality contemporary architecture
• Use landscape to humanize and frame the built environment
• Use durable, reusable, flexible, permeable and repairable pavement materials
• All mechanical equipment shall be screened and shall not project above its enclosure
• Exceptional design is encouraged and may be allowed to deviate from the design
guidelines. However:
o Projects must be exemplary
o They must make a significant contribution to their surroundings
o They must contribute public benefit beyond great design
• Projects should conform with General Downtown Design Guidelines and District Design
Guidelines
• Different districts of Downtown have different design priorities
Gateway District:
• Provide active street fronts along Tamalpais
• Articulate elevations to avoid a “building as wall” parallel to the freeway
• Create a sense of arrival with welcoming gateway elements such as:
o Distinctive building form massing and detailing
o Public plazas
Gateway – Transit District:
• Enhance the Tamalpais greenway from 2nd to Mission as a complete street
• Anchor the district with a high-quality transit center
2nd /3rd Corridor & Lindaro:
• Reduce building mass along the boulevards with 3rd or 4th floor setbacks and at ground
level corner entrances
• Use distinctive forms and detailing at corners particularly those facing oncoming traffic
• Locate retail at intersections and along pedestrian N - S streets
• Enhance the boulevard, by providing continuous curbside planting strips and/or ample
tree pockets with grates
• Consider increasing the 5’ setback requirement along 2nd and 3rd Street
• Varied setback depths are encouraged particularly on NS streets for pedestrian amenities
and landscaping Place back flow preventers, transformers, and other utilities out of site or
in undersidewalk vaults
369 Pine Street, Suite 350 San Francisco CA 94104 | 415-618-0700 | www.seifel.com
Date August 19, 2019
To: Raffi Boloyan, City of San Rafael
From: Seifel Consulting Inc.
Subject: Financial Feasibility Analysis of 703 Third Street
The City of San Rafael retained Seifel Consulting to provide real estate advisory services in connection
with the land use approval process for the proposed development located at 703 Third Street in downtown
San Rafael. Seifel Consulting performed an independent review of the development assumptions and
financial feasibility for various development scenarios that could be built on the site.
This memorandum updates the financial feasibility analysis that was presented to the Planning
Commission in February 2019. As will be further described in this memorandum, it evaluates three
development scenarios:
¥ 61-unit “Base Case” scenario, which assumes a 35% density bonus per State Density Bonus Law
and the provision of affordable housing units in accordance with City and State Density Bonus
Law requirements (9 affordable units)
¥ 120-unit “Proposed Project” scenario, which was voluntarily amended by the Applicant to include
additional affordable housing units (12 affordable units)
¥ 120-unit “Alternative 1” scenario, which would include double the amount of affordable housing
units required under the Base Case (18 affordable units)
Summary of Findings
The financial feasibility analysis presented in this memorandum indicates that the proposed development is
not financially feasible under the Base Case scenario, and additional density needs to be provided in order
for new development to proceed. The additional density being requested in the amended application for the
Proposed Project enhances financial feasibility by increasing development revenues and reducing
development costs per housing unit in the following ways:
¥ Lowers land cost by allowing the cost of land to be spread among a larger number of units.
¥ Lowers construction costs by facilitating more efficient construction across a larger building
envelope and sharing the cost of the concrete podium among more units.
¥ Lowers certain government fees as some fees are fixed and can be spread among more units.
¥ Lowers other indirect soft costs, such as fixed predevelopment, design and engineering costs that
can be shared among more units.
¥ Increases revenues from the addition of market rate units on the property.
Based on the financial analysis described in this memorandum, the higher density and greater number of
units provided in the Proposed Project is necessary to achieve financial feasibility. However, financial
feasibility for the Proposed Project is marginal given the high construction costs and reduced residential
revenue potential associated with the City’s requested modifications and requirements as further described
Page 2
below. Furthermore, the financial analysis indicates that Alternative 1, which contains additional housing
units affordable to very low and low-income households, is not financially viable.
Organization of Memorandum
The memorandum is organized into three sections as follows, concluding with a summary of financial
feasibility findings:
A. Description of Development Scenarios
B. Review of Pro Forma Assumptions and Methodology
C. Financial Feasibility Findings
A. Description of Development Scenarios
The proposed development at 703 Third Street consists of the redevelopment and consolidation of two
contiguous parcels that are currently developed with two existing commercial buildings and associated
surface parking in downtown San Rafael. The proposed development will be built on a 27,395 square foot
lot that is currently zoned at a maximum density of 1 residential unit per 600 square feet of land area.
For this updated analysis, three development scenarios were analyzed to evaluate financial feasibility:
1. Base Case, which consists of a 61-unit mixed use development as allowed under the City’s
existing zoning with an assumed 35 percent (%) density bonus as allowed by State Density Bonus
Law for the provision of on-site affordable housing, as further described below.
o The Base Case scenario assumes the provision of affordable housing according to the
City’s current requirements (20% of the base density or 9 affordable units).
2. Proposed Project, which consists of a 120-unit mixed-use development as described in the
development application submitted by Van Meter Williams Pollack (VMWP) on behalf of the
developer of the property, Seagate Properties Inc. (Seagate) as amended.
o The Proposed Project scenario was revised by the Applicant to include three additional
affordable housing units based on comments received during the February Planning
Commission meeting (27% of the base density or 12 affordable units).
3. Alternative 1, which is consistent with the development application as recently amended except
that it includes twice the amount of affordable housing units as the Base Case
o Alternative 1 assumes additional affordable housing units (40% of the base density or
18 affordable units).
Each of these scenarios is briefly described below.
Base Case Scenario– Given the site acreage, 45 housing units could be built on the property under
existing zoning. In addition, the project is eligible to receive a 35% density bonus and two concessions
under State Density Bonus Law because the developer would provide 11% of the 45 units at restricted
“below market rate” rents that are affordable to very low income households. The 35% density bonus
means that an additional 16 units may be built on the site for a total of 61 units.
The City also has an inclusionary housing ordinance that requires 20% of the allowable 45 units to be
provided at restricted rent levels.1 Thus, the base case scenario includes 5 units that are affordable to very
1 For rental projects such as this, 50% of the affordable units have to be affordable to very low income household (VLI households
with incomes that are less than or equal to 50% of county median income) and 50% of the affordable units have to be affordable
to low income households (LI households with incomes above 50% and up to 80% of county median income).
Page 3
low income households (5 VLI units) and 5 units that are affordable to low income households
(5 LI units). In summary, the base case scenario consists of the following: 2
¥ 61 rental units (15 Studio units, 25 one-bedroom units and 21 two-bedroom units)
¥ 10 affordable housing units (5 VLI units and 5 LI units)
¥ Commercial space of 969 square feet on the ground floor
¥ 61 garage parking spaces on the ground floor
¥ Inner courtyards and rooftop plaza
Proposed Project– The proposed project is based on the development application for a six-story, mixed
use apartment development with five levels of residential above one level of ground floor commercial and
parking. The project applicant is requesting the following modifications to existing zoning:
¥ An additional density bonus of 59 housing units above what is allowed with a 35% Density Bonus
(61 units consistent with the Base Case scenario plus 59 units, for a total of 120 units)
¥ Reduced parking to 1 space per unit as allowed under the State Density Bonus law
¥ A height bonus concession of an additional 7 feet, from 66 feet to 73 feet to mitigate flood impacts
and facilitate the use of puzzle mechanical lifts for parking
¥ A waiver of the required five foot front setback along Third Street.
As described in the staff report, the developer has significantly modified the original development
application over the past three years in response to input from City Staff, the Planning Commission and the
Design Review Board. While these modifications have enhanced the overall project design, they have
reduced the amount of residential units and residential square footage that is able to generate rental
revenues and increased construction costs, as further described in the next sections of this memorandum.
As currently proposed, the Proposed Project consists of the following uses: 3
¥ 120 rental units (33 Studio units, 44 one-bedroom units and 43 two-bedroom units)
¥ 12 affordable housing units (5 VLI units, 4 LI units, 3 Moderate Income or Mod units)
¥ Commercial space of 969 square feet on the ground floor
¥ 121 garage parking spaces on the ground floor including 112 mechanical parking lifts
¥ Inner courtyards and rooftop plaza
The Proposed Project includes an increased amount of affordable housing units, 12 affordable units, which
represents 27% of the 45 units allowed on the project site under existing zoning.
Alternative 1– Alternative 1 is consistent with the development application for a six-story, mixed use
apartment development. This scenario is substantively the same as the Proposed Project except that it
contains additional affordable housing units as follows:
¥ 18 affordable housing units (10 VLI units and 8 LI units)
The 18 affordable housing units in Alternative 1 represent 40% of the 45 units allowed on the project site
under existing zoning.
2 https://www.cityofsanrafael.org/703-3/
3 https://www.cityofsanrafael.org/703-3/
Page 4
B. Review of Developer Financial Assumptions and Pro Forma
The financial analysis is based on a review of a summary financial pro forma analysis and supporting
materials that were provided by the project applicant supplemented by additional data and analysis
performed by the City of San Rafael and Seifel Consulting Inc. (Seifel). During the performance of this
assignment, Seifel reviewed a series of confidential financial analyses, supporting documents and
interviewed City staff, development team representatives and members of the real estate community
(including developers, contractors, market specialists and architects) to perform due diligence.
As described above, the financial feasibility of the development is evaluated under three development
scenarios that include varying numbers of housing units and percentages of affordable housing.
1. Development Costs
Development costs consist of the following key cost categories: land, hard construction costs, government
fees, construction financing and other soft costs, such as project design. Some of these development costs
are driven primarily by the site characteristics and construction type (such as hard construction costs)
while others have a significant fixed-cost component (such as land costs). Seifel performed due diligence
on each of the major cost components and found the following:
¥ Land costs– The cost of land in the financial analysis is based on the actual purchase cost for the
property without any upward adjustment to reflect additional costs related to debt financing or
equity that might be needed to raise sufficient funds to pay for land during the entitlement and/or
construction period. The developer indicated that the site is currently generating income that is
currently sufficient to pay annual land carrying costs.
¥ Hard construction costs– Hard construction costs include direct construction costs related to site
work, building construction, parking, and general contractor charges for general requirements,
general conditions, insurance, overhead and profit. Construction costs represent the majority of the
development costs, and thus typically have a significant effect on feasibility. Nova Partners Inc.
(Nova), a reputable construction estimator with considerable experience throughout the Bay Area,
prepared the estimates based on new construction of a wood frame building constructed over a
concrete, above-grade podium that includes ground floor retail, parking and a puzzle lift system.
While the construction costs per unit and square foot are higher than what we have observed for
other similar residential developments in the North Bay and San Francisco, we understand from
Nova, VMWP and Seagate that the costs are higher for the following reasons:
o The current Bay Area construction boom coupled with the rebuilding of fire-damaged
areas across California, including Santa Rosa, has created a severe shortage of contractors
and subcontractors in the North Bay and throughout the entire Bay Area. According to
construction specialists, this has resulted in construction costs increasing at double-digit
rates in recent years.
o The property is a tight urban site with surrounding developments on all sides, which
increase the costs for staging, ingress/egress and safety features.
o The property is located in a FEMA flood plain and has other unique site conditions that
increase site improvement, foundation and building construction costs due to increased
heights for the ground floor and the overall building.
Page 5
o In order to achieve a 1:1 parking ratio, a mechanical parking system is required, which
requires an extra tall ground floor to accommodate a triple stacked automated parking
system. This adds to the foundation and concrete wall cost to build the base “box.”
o The developer has made many changes to the building design, exterior finishes and
materials at the request of City staff, the Design Review Board, Planning Commission,
and various community homeowner groups. These modifications have reduced building
efficiencies, decreased building square footage and increased costs in the following ways.
o The addition of the exterior balconies substantially increases the cost of the exterior skin
and reduces the amount of rentable building space, which means that the building-wide
costs can only be spread over a smaller amount of residential square footage.
o The stepping back of the top floors adds greater costs to structural design as well as the
exterior skin of the building. The step back typically requires structure loads to be carried
down to the ground floor with a steel frame that extends from the 5th to the ground floor.
The step back also reduces the amount of rentable building space, which in turn reduces
potential apartment income.
o As this urban infill site does not have the ability to incorporate open space at grade, the
building includes an extensive roof deck that significantly increases the weight on the
upper floor, requires waterproofing, necessitates upgraded roof materials, and incorporates
specialized landscaping features and upgraded aesthetic finishes.
o Given the building design and site conditions, skilled trades would be used to build most
of the building component parts, likely incorporating a high proportion of skilled union
labor.
¥ Government fees– The project sponsor will be required to pay City planning and development
impact fees (such as building permit fees, planning fees and development impact fees) as well as
fees that are required to be paid to other government entities (such as fees for schools, water and
sewer provision). The City worked with the project applicant and provided a current cost estimate
for these government fees based on published fee schedules to be used in the financial analysis.4
¥ Construction Financing– Construction financing typically represents the major source of capital
that pays for development costs during construction. The construction financing assumptions used
in this analysis are generally representative of current construction financing terms for similar
projects in the North Bay and San Francisco.
¥ Other Soft Costs– Other soft costs include predevelopment costs (such as environmental review),
architectural design, engineering services, legal fees, marketing, and other professional fees paid
by the developer.
The total development costs projected in the developer’s financial pro forma analysis are considered to be
within a reasonable range for new residential development. However, as further described below in the last
section, a sensitivity analysis was conducted to see how the financial results would differ under alternative
development cost scenarios.
4 This updated analysis assumes that the City’s transportation impact fees would not need to be paid on the affordable housing
units, which slightly decreases the total amount of government fees as compared to the February analysis.
Page 6
2. Revenue Generation
Revenues for the project come primarily from rental of the apartments. The future rental of ground floor
retail space, as well as the leasing of a small number of parking spaces, is projected to generate a small
amount of commercial revenue.5
The Concord Group (TCG), real estate and market specialists with considerable experience in evaluating
the market for similar developments in the Bay Area, performed a market analysis that provided excellent
market data on residential apartments and the competitive market for homes that might be rented or sold to
potential residents. Given recent market conditions, market rent levels are unlikely to be significantly
higher than what is being projected by TCG given rental rates at comparable apartment buildings and the
relative cost of ownership housing in North Bay cities.
Rents for affordable units are based on the recently updated 2019 schedule for affordable rents at below
market rents (exclusive of utility costs) that would be affordable to households at various target income
levels based on areawide median income (AMI) for the County of Marin.6
Based on guidance from City staff and the applicant’s proposal, the financial pro forma assumes that the
affordable rents for VLI units would be affordable to households at 50% AMI, affordable rents for LI units
would be calculated at 70% AMI and affordable rents for Mod units would be calculated at 120% AMI.
The City has the discretion to allow alternative rent levels to be applied as part of the development
approval process with the exception that at least five units must be affordable to households at 50% AMI
in accordance with State Density Bonus Law.
The market rent and affordable rent assumptions by unit type are held constant across all scenarios.
3. Development Value
Based on a typical valuation method that appraisers use to value properties, future development value is
projected by capitalizing the annual net operating income (NOI) from the property using a market-based
capitalization rate. (This is equivalent to dividing annual NOI by the cap rate.)
Net operating income is equal to projected revenues less an allowance for vacancy less annual projected
operating expenses. (Operating expenses include property management, administration, staff salaries,
insurance, building maintenance costs, property taxes, and other operating expenses.)
For this analysis, a standard 5% vacancy allowance is applied to residential rental units to account for both
vacant units and turnover as one renter leaves and another moves in. The project applicant provided
operating expenses projections for the proposed development based on their experience in managing
properties in San Rafael and other western cities. Their assumed operating expenses are lower on a per unit
basis than what we have observed for other multifamily residential developments in the Bay Area, but we
understand that Seagate anticipates being able to achieve operating efficiencies at this development given
its scale and their other properties in the area.
5 Parking revenue is anticipated to be minimal given current market conditions in Southern Marin County where most apartment
developments provide at least one parking space per unit at no additional charge. Commercial income is projected to represent
about 1% of total revenues.
6 The affordable or BMR rents are based on a household income and rent schedule provided by the County of Marin, which
advises on the City of San Rafael’s housing programs. The rent schedule shows affordable rents for households at different
household income levels for each bedroom type based on a percentage of areawide median income. The assumed rents for the
affordable units are reduced to reflect a standard utility allowance for each unit type by bedroom size.
Page 7
As described previously, design modifications have decreased the amount of leasable residential square
feet, and they have also made the building less efficient from an operating and leasing perspective. This
coupled with the provision of affordable housing constrains revenue generation.
The future value of the development is projected under two valuation scenarios:
¥ The first scenario uses a cap rate of 4.5%, consistent with what was assumed in the developer’s
financial pro forma. This is a reasonable cap rate assumption for pro forma purposes given the
project location and anticipated timing for development.
¥ To test feasibility, a lower cap rate of 4.25% was also used, as this could be achievable given the
project’s location in Southern Marin County where little new development has occurred. The use
of a lower cap rate yields a higher development value, which increases potential developer margin.
As the developer did not assume any sales transaction expense in their pro forma, no deduction is made for
these costs. Often, sales transaction expenses (such as brokerage fees and title/recording fees) can range
between 2% to 3% of development value for apartment buildings, which would reduce net revenues to the
developer from the development.
The combination of lower than average operating expenses and no allowance for sales transaction costs
means that the potential development value may be lower than projected in this analysis.
4. Return Metrics
Developers, lenders and investors evaluate and measure returns in several ways. Based on input from real
estate developers, equity investors and lenders, development returns are based on two key measures
typically used by the real estate community.
a. Developer Margin and Margin on Cost
Developer margin is equal to the difference between net development value and total development costs
(before consideration of developer return or profit).7 A developer will not proceed to build a project unless
the project generates sufficient developer margin to warrant the risk and private investment needed to
undertake the project.
Developers and investors use different target return thresholds depending on the level of complexity of the
project, construction types, construction schedule, sales/rental absorption timeline and potential equity
sources. Projects with a greater number of units, complexity of construction and longer timelines have
higher risk and as a result require a higher margin on cost. This type and size of mixed-use development
would likely have a margin on cost threshold that ranges between 18–25%, as measured by developer
margin or return divided by development cost.8
b. Yield on Cost
Yield on cost (YOC) or stabilized yield is used to evaluate development feasibility for apartment
development. 9 YOC is measured based on Net Operating Income (NOI) divided by development costs.10
NOI is equal to projected rental revenues less vacancy allowance less operating expenses.
7 Net development value equals gross development value less transaction expenses.
8 This is equivalent to a return threshold of about 15% to 20% when measured as return on net revenues. This developer
margin/return needs to take into account potential changes in costs and revenues.
9 This return metric is also referred to as return on cost by real estate developers, lenders and investors.
10 These return metrics are considered the typical “back of the envelope” way of determining real estate feasibility and are
typically based on current rent and cost assumptions (not trended upward to reflect potential future increases).
Page 8
The target YOC for apartments in the North Bay and San Francisco over the past decade has ranged from
5% to 7% based on a review of project pro formas and discussions with developers and equity investors.
Currently, developers and investors are using a target 5.5% YOC threshold in the surrounding market area.
However, some private owners and investors may be willing to accept lower return thresholds and will
move forward with providing debt and equity capital for developments like 703 Third Street in markets
like Southern Marin County that has growing housing demand and limited apartment production.
C. Financial Feasibility Findings
The financial analysis compares the anticipated revenues and project value that could be generated by the
development with the development costs under each of the development scenarios described above in
order to test the overall financial feasibility using typical return measures. Based on the projected
development revenues and costs described earlier, the financial analysis indicates the following:
¥ The Base Case Scenario is not financially feasible based on the development revenue and cost
projections used in the developer’s financial pro forma, as the developer margin is negative
(meaning that development costs exceed revenues).
¥ Construction cost savings could potentially be achieved with modification of the proposed design
features, additional value engineering or the use of more innovative construction methods.
However, even if construction costs could be lowered by 10% to 15%, the Base Case Scenario is
not feasible as the developer margin is still significantly negative under both valuation scenarios.
¥ Financial feasibility of the Proposed Project is enhanced by the significant addition of units with
the additional density because revenues increase and development costs can be spread among a
greater number of housing units, which results in:
o Lower land costs per unit
o Lower construction costs per unit, achieved by facilitating more efficient construction
across a larger building envelope and spreading the cost of the concrete podium among
more units
o Lower government fees per unit for fees that do not vary based on numbers of units
o Lower soft costs per unit, such as fixed predevelopment, design and engineering costs
o Higher average revenue per unit due to the addition of market rate units.
¥ While the Proposed Project Scenario generates a positive developer margin based on the
development assumptions used in the financial pro forma, it does not achieve a high enough
developer margin or Yield on Cost to be feasible according to the typical return metrics described
above. Development costs would need to be significantly reduced and a higher valuation achieved
in order for the Proposed Project to achieve adequate return levels. As described earlier, the final
design of the Proposed Project includes a number of important design features that add significant
construction costs, so it may be difficult to achieve substantial cost savings.
¥ Given the significant reduction in revenues from doubling the number of affordable housing units,
Alternative 1 is not financially feasible based on the development assumptions in the financial pro
forma and with a higher assumed valuation. (The developer margin/return is negative as
development costs exceed revenues.) It’s unlikely that construction costs can be lowered to the
extent necessary to achieve feasibility under Alternative 1.
In conclusion, the financial feasibility analysis presented above indicates that the proposed development is
not financially feasible under the Base Case scenario or Alternative 1. The additional density and housing
units being requested in the application for the Proposed Project enhances financial feasibility by reducing
development costs per housing unit as described above. Based on the financial analysis described in this
memorandum, we find that the higher density and greater number of units provided in the Proposed Project
would be necessary to achieve financial feasibility.