Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.

No preview available

The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCD 190 El CerritoCITY OF Agenda Item No: 5 b no � Meeting Date: June 4, 2012 SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Department: Community D lopmen t Prepared by: Paul Jensen City Manager Approval:f Community Development Director (RBI* SUBJECT: 190 EI Cerrito Ave (Untermann Subdivision) — Request for Rezoning, Tentative Map and Environmental & Design Review Permit to allow; 1) the subdivision of the single 6.24 -acre hillside parcel into two lots, with the existing single family home at 190 EI Cerrito remaining on a 3.24 -acre parcel and a new single family home proposed on a new 3.0 -acre parcel; 2) Rezoning of the site from a Planned Development to a revised Planned Development to reflect the proposed project; and 3) conceptual review for compliance with hillside guidelines the design and siting for the proposed new single family residence; APN: 011-121-10; Planned Development — Hillside Overlay (PD -H) District; Tom and Merrie Untermann, owners; Al Cornwell/CSW Stuber-Stroeh, applicant; File No(s).: TS11-004, ZC11-003 and ED11-047 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Adopt Resolution adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; 2. Adopt Ordinance approving the Rezoning from Planned Development District (PD) to a revised PD District; and 3. Adopt Resolution Conditionally Approving the Environmental and Design Review Permit and Tentative Parcel Map applications for the project. BACKGROUND: A detailed background, project description, discussion of review by the Design Review Board and discussion of the project analysis are contained in the April 10, 2012 Report to the Planning Commission attached to this report (Attachment 2, pages 39 to 73). The draft Mitigated Negative Declaration was previously distributed to the City Council on March 23, 2012 under a separate cover. Setting: The project site is located on the hillside just north of Downtown San Rafael and is a partially developed 6.24 -acre parcel containing one single family home. The total gross acreage for the site is 7.15 -acres, which includes 0.91 -acres of private roadway easement area that is included in the overall lot size for purposes of calculating subdivision density. The subject site borders City open space to the west, a portion of Academy Heights residential subdivision to the north, and single-family homes on Culloden Park Ave to the east. The project site is currently zoned with a "shell' Planned Development —Hillside Overlay (PD -H), and maintains a Hillside Residential Resource General Plan Land Use designation (0.2 -.05 units/acre). The site is located at the eastern edge of the Fairhills Neighborhood, just south east of the former quarry that is currently developed as the Academy Heights subdivision. The site exhibits steep hillside topography with an average slope of 40.57%. EI Cerrito Ave is a private roadway that extends north off Bryn Mawr Ave. EI Cerrito Ave. abuts the subject site and then turns southward and snakes around the two adjacent properties, a single family residence at 180 EI Cerrito and another single family residence home (referred to as the "castle") at 185 EI Cerrito Ave. EI Cerrito Ave FOR CITY CLERK ONLY File No.: Council Meeting: Disposition: SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Pa2e: 2 then dead ends on the subject property. EI Cerrito Ave is a private roadway that has common use amongst the three properties near the end of the road. The structure at 185 EI Cerrito, the "castle", is listed on the City's Architectural/Historic Survey and is ranked as "Exceptional." History: The existing 4,800 sq. ft. single-family home on the property was built in the early 1990's. The new parcel would be located at the western edge of the site, below and west of the existing single-family home. Prior to 1971, the subject 6.234 acres parcel at 190 EI Cerrito, and the properties at 180 EI Cerrito (1.17 acre) and 185 EI Cerrito Ave (.93 acres) were all one lot. In 1988, the Planning Commission granted approval to subdivide 7.4 acres surrounding the adjacent "castle" property into two additional lots, (i.e., 190 and 180 EI Cerrito Ave). At that time, the City imposed a "scenic restriction" along the south and western slopes of the 190 EI Cerrito Ave lot, restricting any structures and development in that area. The scenic restriction was not required on the eastern side of the property that is the subject of the current request for subdivision, given the limited visibility of that area from off site. In 1988 the City granted Design Review approval for a home on the lot at 180 EI Cerrito Ave. Project Description: Planning applications have been filed with the Community Development Department requesting development approvals, including: 1) Rezoning from Planned Development (PD) District to a revised PD District; 2) Tentative Parcel Map to subdivide the one 6.24 acre property into two separate properties (a 3.0 acre lot for the new home and a 3.24 acre lot for the existing home); and 3) Environmental and Design Review Permit to demonstrate a conceptual siting and massing plan for development of a new home to allow the City to review the appropriateness of the building location, establish any building envelopes and ensure that a new structure can be built that meets all the applicable hillside standards. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Review: An Initial Study was completed for the project, which resulted in preparation of a Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). The MND was circulated for a 20 -day public review period commencing on March 23, 2012. The MND was distributed to the Planning Commission and City Council under a separate cover at the start of the review period. A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) also has been prepared and incorporated into the MND. No public comments were received on the MND at the April 10, 2012 Planning Commission hearing. The Initial Study/MND found potentially significant impacts in the area of Air Quality and Cultural Resources, but recommends mitigation measures that would reduce project impacts to a less -than - significant level. Air quality impacts are construction -related and would be addressed by incorporation of typical mitigation measures required to reduce dust and fumes. Standard mitigation is also recommended to address the low potential for cultural resources to be encountered during construction. The mitigation measures are listed in the MMPR prepared for the project. All project impacts would be mitigated to less - than -significant levels. These mitigation measures are incorporated into conditions of project approval, and are listed in draft Resolution (Attachment 1a, pages 10 to 15), which includes a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). Design Review Board Comments: The Design Review Board (DRB) reviewed the project at its September 20, 2011 meeting. There are no written minutes from this meeting given that DRB meetings are now video recorded. The video of the actual proceedings from the meeting can be viewed at www.citvofsanrafael.orq/meetings by clicking on the "video" link for the September 20, 2011 Design Review Board meeting. By a vote of 4-0-1 (Member Huntsberry absent), the DRB unanimously recommended approval of the project with one modification to the draft PD text. The Board supported the project as presented, finding the lot layout, building envelope logical and appropriate for the hillside site. The Board found that the applicant adequately demonstrated the new lot could be developed in accordance with the hillside design guidelines and Hillside development standards. As part of its recommendation, the Board suggested that specific limited and defined improvements should be allowed in the front of the property, between the SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Pa2e: 3 front building envelope and front property line. Staff incorporated the DRB recommendations into the Draft PD text that was presented to the Planning Commission, consisting of additional language and definition to section 2.F of the Draft PD to clarify the type and scope of improvements that may be installed to the front of the building envelope. Planning Commission Review: The Planning Commission reviewed the project at its April 10, 2012 meeting. There are no written minutes from this meeting given that Commission meetings are now video recorded. The video of the actual proceedings from the meeting can be viewed at www.citvofsanrafael.orglmeetings by clicking on the "video" link for the April 10, 2012 Planning Commission meeting. A complete copy of the Staff Report to the Planning Commission is attached (Attachment 2, pages 39 to 77) The Commission accepted staff's report, applicant's presentation and public comments prior to conducting its discussion of the project. The Commission identified a single issue that warranted further discussion, with regard to the PD revisions recommended by the DRB to allow certain improvements outside the building envelope. The Commission's concern was that allowing any sort of improvements outside the building envelope would lead to complete disturbance of the area and might cause the natural state requirement to be exceeded. The Commission proposed further revisions to the draft PD Section 2.F.5 , as follows: 2.F.5 The area between the front property line (street) and the front of the building envelope may contain minor improvements essential for: 1) vehicular access and parking; 2) pedestrian access, 3) residential services (i.e. postal mail, garbage collection); and 4) needed utility and drainage facilities. The type, design and appropriateness of any improvements on the frontage area shall be evaluated and approved through the Design Review Permit process required for the development of the single family home. With this change Commission was satisfied with the adequacy of the project and took the following action: ➢ Adopted Resolution # 12-03 recommending to the council adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program. On a 6-0 vote (Commissioner Pick absent). Adopted Resolution #12-04 recommending to the City Council approval of the PD Rezoning, with the revision to the language in section 2.F.5 of the PD. Vote of 5-1-1 (Commissioner Paul voting No and Commissioner Pick Absent). Adopt Resolution #12-05 recommending to the City Council approval of the Tentative Map and Environmental and Design Review Permit with the change to the language regarding development outside the building envelope. Vote of 5-1-1 (Commissioner Paul voting No and Commissioner Pick absent) Commissioner Paul indicated that the sole reason he voted against the PD Rezoning and Tentative Map and Design Review Permit approvals was due to the change made to the language in Section 2.F.5. He indicated that he thought the flexibility that was contained in the language as previously recommended by the Board was appropriate. The PD text presented to the Council in Attachment 1 b incorporates the Commission's final recommendation. ANALYSIS: Analysis of General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Design Guidelines and Subdivision Ordinance The proposed Planned Development Rezoning, Tentative Subdivision Map and Design Review Permit applications would permit the subdivision of the existing property into two separate lots. The existing home would remain on one of the new lots and a new lot would be created that could be developed with a new single family home. A full analysis on the General Plan 2020, San Rafael Design Guidelines, Hillside Design Guidelines Zoning Ordinance, and Subdivision Ordinance is contained in the April 10, 2012 Planning Commission staff report (Attachment 2, pages 39 to 73) and in the findings contained in the Resolution (Attachment 1a, 1b and 1c). Based on staff and Planning Commission review, the project with proposed Mitigation Measures and conditions of approval would be consistent with all General Plan 2020 policies (as amended), and the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Paee: 4 NOTICE/CORRESPONDENCE: Notice of the City Council public hearing was published in the Marin Independent Journal on Saturday, May 19, 2012, and mailed to neighboring property owners, businesses and residents within 300 feet and surrounding neighborhood associations on Friday, May 18, 2012. The site was also posted with a public hearing notice board at the start of the 15 day notice period. A copy of the public hearing notice and the notification list are attached (Attachment 3, pages 78 to 80). To date, no written comments have been received regarding this project. Prior to the DRB and PC meetings, staff received a total of three phone calls about the project from neighbors. Two of the phone calls received prior to the DRB meeting were concerned about drainage and traffic intensification from the new subdivision and second unit, and speeding on EI Cerrito Ave. The phone call received prior to the Planning Commission hearing was received from a neighbor on Bryn Mawr Dr., interested in whether this project would impact their home. No written or verbal comments were received on the Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration from neighbors, other interested parties or outside agencies. At the Planning Commission hearing, two members of the public commented. One commenter expressed concern with drainage from the site downstream along EI Cerrito Ave, and the other expressed concern that the project might gain access from the end of Stewart St. Staff explained that all drainage would continue in its current pattern, which would be collected on-site and conveyed through an existing drainage channel westward toward Culloden Dr. The drainage plan and City ordinances require that post - development drainage levels must not increase to pre -development levels in terms of both volume and intensity. Therefore, drainage would be retained and metered out from the site to maintain existing runoff conditions down-slope of the project site. Staff further explained that the project would not gain access from Stewart St, and there would no additional traffic or driveways proposed off Stewart St. FISCAL IMPACT: This project is a private development and does not have any new fiscal impact on the City budget given that the review and processing of these applications are subject to cost recovery fees. Furthermore, new traffic improvement and parkland dedication fees would be triggered from the development of a new home, to fund the fair share cost of additional residential development. The site development would generate a minimal increase to local and state property tax revenues, which would fund/offset costs of providing additional public services to the site occupants. Property tax is generated in the amount of approximately 1% of project assessed valuation, which is distributed to local and state entities. OPTIONS: The following options may be considered by the City Council on this matter: 1. Approve the proposed project as presented (staff recommendation). 2. Approve the project with additional modifications or conditions of approval. 3. Continue the public hearing and refer the applications back to the Planning Commission for additional review and modifications. 4. Continue the public hearing and require additional information or environmental analysis. 5. Deny the project and direct staff to return with revised Resolutions. SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT /PsDc:5 ACTIONS REQUIRED: |tiarecommended that the City Council: 1. Open the public hearing and accept public testimon�,; 2. Close the public hearing; 3. Adopt appropriate Resolutions and Ordinance, including a. Adopt Resolution adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Attachment 1a); b. Pass Ordinance to print approving the Rezoning from Planned Development District (PD) to a revised PID District (Attachment 1b).and o. Adopt Resolution Conditionally Approving the Environmental and Design Review Permit and Tentative Parcel Map applications for the project (Attachment 1c). ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Resolutions/Ordinances PAGE NO a. Draft Resolution Adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and MyWRP T b. Draft Ordinance Adopting the Planned Development Rezoning 17 c. Draft Resolution Conditionally Approving the Tentative Parcel Map and 29 Environmental and Design Review Permit applications 2. Planning Commission Staff Report with selected exhibits, April 10. 2012 39 Exhibit -Looatinn Map 51 Exhibit 3 - General Plan 2820Consistency Table 62 Exhibit 4 - Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table 65 Exhibit 5- 'App|icadon Materials a. Letter from applicant, June 1S.2O11 74 b. Calculation ofAverage Slope and Slope Density Analysis Table 77 4. Public Hearing Notice for City Council Meeting and mailing list 78 Distributed to the City Council only: * Reduced Plans Project Plans (/I.x17') v Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (Distributed Previously on March 23. 2012 under separate cover) RESOLUTION NO. 13355 RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVAL OF A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP) FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT - HILLSIDE OVERLAY DISTRICT REZONING AND TWO LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION AT 190 EL CERRITO AVE (UNTERMANN 2 LOT SUBDIVISION) (APN 011-021-10) WHEREAS, on June 23, 2011, an application requesting a Planned Development Rezoning (ZC11-003) as filed by Al Cornwell of CSW/Stuber-Stroeh on behalf of the property owners Tom and Merrie Untermann, to the Community Development Department requesting approval of a Rezoning from a shell PD -H to a revised PD -H with appropriate development regulations to allow for the subdivision of a single, 6.24 -acre hillside parcel (7.15 gross acres) into two lots, with the existing single family home at 190 El Cerrito Ave remaining on a 3.24 -acre parcel and a new single family home proposed on a new 3.0 - acre parcel, and the application was subsequently deemed complete for processing; and WHEREAS, the applications include concurrent requests for a PD Rezoning to a revised Planned Development (PD -II) District (ZC11-003), a Tentative Parcel Map (TS11-004) for a two lot hillside subdivision and an Environmental and Design Review Permit (EDI 1-047) for the conceptual design and building feasibility; and WHEREAS, consistent with the requirements of the City of San Rafael Environmental Assessment Procedures Manual and the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for the proposed project, which found that the project would not result in a significant effect on the environment in that revisions to the project have been made or agreed to by the project applicant to mitigate potential adverse impacts to Air Quality and Cultural Resources; and WHEREAS, consistent with the provisions of CEQA, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared to implement the project mitigation measures and to accompany the Mitigated Negative Declaration; and WHEREAS, notices regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for this project were published in the Marin Independent Journal on Saturday, March 24, 2012, a local newspaper of general circulation in the area; and WHEREAS, on March 22, 2012, public notices were mailed to surrounding property owners and residents within 300 feet, pertinent agencies (including responsible and trustee agencies), organizations and special interest groups pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15072; and WHEREAS. the site was also posted with a public hearing notice board on March 22, 2012, for a 20 day period in advance of the April 10, 2012 public hearing; and WHEREAS, the Mitigated Negative Declaration was made available for a 20 -day review period by pertinent agencies and interested members of the public, commencing on March 22, 2012: and WHEREAS, on April 10, 2012, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed project and the Mitigated Negative Declaration, accepting all oral and written public testimony and the written report of the Department of Community Development. On a 6-0-1 vote (Commissioner Colin absent), the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 12-03 recommending to the City Council adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; and WHEREAS, notices regarding the project, including the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for this project, were published in the Marin Independent Journal on Saturday, May 19, 2012, a local newspaper of general circulation in the area; and WHEREAS, on May 18, 2012, public notices were mailed to surrounding property owners and residents within 300 feet, pertinent agencies (including responsible and trustee agencies), organizations and special interest groups pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15072; and WHEREAS, the site was also posted with a public hearing notice board for a 15 day period in advance of the June 4, 2012 public hearing; and WHEREAS, on June 4, 2012, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed project and the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, accepting all public testimony and the written report of the Department of Community Development. WHEREAS, the City has not received any comments on the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program from public agencies, utilities, organizations, special interest groups and persons who have reviewed the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; and WHEREAS, the custodian of documents which constitute the record of proceedings upon which this decision is based is the Community Development Department. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of San Rafael hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approves the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program as presented in Exhibit "A" based on the findings that: a) The City Council exercised its independent judgment in evaluating the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been considered in conjunction with comments received during the public review period and at the Planning Commission and City Council hearings. Based on this review, the City Council has determined that: 1) there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant impact on the environment; and 2) revisions have been made to the project and have been included in the project as mitigation measures which reduce the potential impacts to Air Quality and Cultural Resources to a less - than -significant level. b) A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared to ensure implementation of and compliance with all measures required to mitigate all impacts to a less -than -significant level. I, Esther C. Beirne, Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of San Rafael, held on Monday, the 4`h of June, 2012, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Connolly, Heller, Levine, McCullough & Mayor Phillips NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ESTHER C. BEIRNE, City Clerk Exhibit "A" Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program a.: W Cs -6 Es o C,3 a t; t"4 fo O p 03 0 � n r.4 ;24 0j) 10 o gn 1.4 bb_ rl -b m( 3 0 al = 0 cg 7s -C o3 0 Q -0 Cc, E U .r_ u al t, CZ C,3 IY al > V, v Cs -6 Es o C,3 t; t"4 Cs -6 Es w a o •V o � �U o � o r 0� Q' � v "F" cs i o a? �' 10 m N ?? s 2 O b o c �s Q o o d -0 ti 0"4 =' o '� 3 w �.� v,x.� a3 ca �-o� a� vim. 23 � m � v?C�3 v > y•° m Y o ac U 3 Ec E' s=� a a� v o v •� y fir' U G ° '✓, "�j" ��,, G Ti 6�J U iC v t�8 .s".. ��.' , �. ��.. C cC ^� Y Qi N 'b N vr', y "^�� ..fit.' v �r °> y Q c H s 'f � u w v a Izo WN 21: n E3 0 -0 N 0 O � > P4 o 71 r- r. 0 ctj Z 3 � A U ct N V M Cl, , Ta w :3 v E "::$ b g — r. 4 15 V� CCC co�U i3 6-1 Q J Utp th c3 al R 0 03 cn —Z ID bj) t14 U Z 0 v vG p H b C 3 � ua 21: M ?%I o 7� q A4 C) 00 cis CL t4 OC 0 U m Q 0- m 10 `4 7 00 -o0 � vi 0 CIS u u u con in. > o s 0 ct u cr, V, t�h 0 Lx: cv a C-11 ami OJ Q ;n 7:1 o 7� q A4 C) 00 cis CL t4 OC 0 U m Q 0- m 10 `4 7 00 -o0 � vi 0 CIS u u u con in. > o s 0 ct u cr, V, t�h 0 Lx: cv a C-11 M, 9% I !—r-, El: 'E Hi cc CIS u C-1 C,5 CZ cr u < Q I !—r-, El: q4j O CY o C, o. v U R r cl, a) al U cl, IZ C) c: C, V a3 c,3 p vi F v f, cq tot u Q cz V cl 03 m m ORDINANCE NO. 1905 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL REZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY FROM PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) — HILLSIDE OVERLAY (-H) DISTRICT (PD -H) TO A REVISED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT— HILLSIDE OVERLAY (PD—H) DISTRICT (ZC11-003) FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF THE SITE INTO TWO LOTS AND DEVELOPMENT OF ONE NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 190 EL CERRITO AVE (UNTERMANN 2 LOT SUBDIVISION) (APN 011-121-10) WHEREAS, the existing 6.24 -acre site was subdivided from a larger 7.4 acre site in 1988 (S87-13) at which time a 1.17 acre lot now developed with 180 E1 Cerrito Ave was created and the subject 6.24 acre site was created; and WHEREAS, the 6.24 subject site (7.15 gross acres) was developed with the existing single family home (190 EI Cerrito Ave) based on the approval of Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED87-54) in 1987; WHEREAS, as part of the 1992 Zoning Ordinance update, this site was re -designated as a shell Planned Development - Hillside Overlay District, a designation which was assigned to all large undeveloped or underdeveloped hillside properties; and WHEREAS, on June 23, 2011, an application requesting a Planned Development Rezoning was filed by Al Cornwell of CSW/Stuber-Stroeh on behalf of the property owners Tom and Merrie Untermann, to the Community Development Department requesting approval of a Rezoning from a shell PD -H to a revised PD -1-1 with appropriate development regulations to allow for the subdivision of a single, 6.24 -acre hillside parcel into two lots, with the existing single family home at 190 EI Cerrito Ave remaining on a 3.24 -acre parcel and a new single family home proposed on a new 3.0 -acre parcel, and the application was subsequently deemed complete for processing; and WHEREAS, the current Planned Development (PD -H) District zoning for this site does not contain appropriate land use limitations and development standards, as required by Section 14.07.060 of the Zoning Ordinance. PD Rezoning has been initiated to establish the required development standards for the following: a) subdivision of the one existing 6.24 acre lot (7.15 gross acres) into two lots (3.0 acre and 3.24 acre); b) the development of a single family home on the newly created 3.0 acre lot, subject to submittal of a formal Design Review Permit application at a future date; and c) incorporate the existing and previously approved single family development at 190 El Cerrito Ave on the 3.24 acre lot, as outlined in Exhibit "B" — Unterniann Land Division - Planned Development District- Hillside Overlay); and WHEREAS. aecompanNing applications for a Tentative Parcel %lap (TS 11-004) and Environmental and Design ReLieiv Permit (ED11-0.17) have been submitted and are being processed concurrent with the Rezoning application. as required by the Zoning Ordinance: and WHEREAS, upon review of the subject applications an Initial Study.'Nlitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for the project consistent with the requirements of the California Em iromnental Quality Act (CEQA): and WHEREAS, public notice of the Planning Commission hearing was provided through: a) mailing of public notice to property owners and residents within 300 feet of the site and interested parties and agencies 20 days in advance of the April 10, 2012 public hearing; b) the posting of a public hearing notice board on the site for a 20 day period in advance of the April 10, 2012 public hearing; and c) publishing a notice in the Marin Independent Journal on March 24, 2012; and WHEREAS, by adoption of a separate Resolution (Resolution No.: 12-03), the Planning Commission has recommended adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project; and WHEREAS, by adoption of a separate Resolution (Resolution No.: 12-05), the Planning Commission has recommended approval of the Tentative Parcel Map (TS11-004) and Environmental and Design Review Permit (EDI1-047)to the City Council, which approve the proposed subdivision, site improvements and review the conceputal building plans to ensure that the new lot can be built in accordance with the Hillside Guidelines and standards; and WHEREAS, on April 10, 2012, the San Rafael Planning Commission held a duly - noticed public hearing on the proposed Planned District Rezoning, as required by State law, accepting all oral and written public testimony and the written report of the Community Development Department staff reports relevant to the proposal. On a 5-1-1vote (Commissioners Paul dissenting and Commissioner Pick absent), the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 12-04 recommending to the City Council adoption of the PD Rezoning; and WHEREAS, on June 4, 2012, the City Council held a public hearing and considered the Rezoning application to Rezone the subject property from PD -H to PD -H with appropriate development standards for the proposed project along with responses to public testimony. WHEREAS, by adoption of separate Resolutions, the City Council adopted the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and the project applications Environmental and Design Review Permit (EDI 1-047) and "Tentative Parcel Map (TS 11-004); and WHEREAS, the custodian of documents which constitute the record of proceedings upon which this decision is based, is the Community Development Department. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby makes the following findings, as required under San Rafael Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) Sections 14.07.040 (Planned Development) and 14.27.060 (Amendments) in support of proposed PD Rezoning to PD -H District for the Untermann Land Division for the subdivision of the 6.24 acre lot (1.15 gross acres) into two lots as presented in the PD Rezoning map attached as Exhibit "A", with the PD -H District subject to the land use regulations and development standards outlined in Exhibit -13- attached hereto as follows: 1. The Development Plan is consistent in principle with the San Rafael General Plan 2020 and other applicable City plans or policies in that the C ntermcmn Land Di0siun - Plunned Develolmient District -- Hillside Overlat document includes appropriate deN elopment standards as detailed in the General Plan 2020 Consistency Table ( prepared for the project and included as an exhibit to the April 10, 2012 Staff Report to the 2 Planning Commission) in that the proposed PD rezoning of the 6.24 acre lot (7.15 gross acres) into two smaller parcels (a 3.0 acre site for new development and 3.24 acre site for the exiting development at 190 EI Cerrito) would be within the residential density range allowed by the Hillside Residential Resource General Plan 2020 land use designation that allows between 0.2 and 0.5 units per gross acre. 2. The project presents a residential development of sustained desirability and stability in harmony with the character of the surrounding single family residential development and has provided adequate open space in that: a) the Development Plan as proposed would cluster the new development and maintain over 67% of the site as a natural state area preserving and enhancing site resources, including the natural hillside and trees surrounding the site; b) the site does not have frontage on a public street, but has adequate access through EI Cerrito Ave, a private roadway, and includes appropriate access rights to provide adequate and safe access to the site; and c) the project design considers the surrounding hillside setting, bordering open space, and the surrounding residential, and recreational development and minimizes to the greatest extent possible impacts to views of hillsides and ridgelines and Mt Tamalpais from public places in that the building envelope would place any new structure on the lower portion of the site and is not visible from public vantage points in Downtown or on the south side of the central San Rafael valley. 3. The applicant has demonstrated that the proposed residential development, including the addition of a new single family lot, could be served by public facilities such as sewer, water, refuse services and other infrastructure resources that currently serve the existing development and are available to serve the proposed additional new lot. Furthermore, the new residential use would not induce population growth necessitating additional public facilities. 4. The residential development would not deviate from typical Zoning Ordinance property development and parking standards and the Planned Development District land use regulations and development standards match that which would be required for a lot of this size under a typical zoning designation. The auto, bicycle and pedestrian traffic systems presented on the Development Plan is adequately designed for circulation needs and public safety in that: a) the Development Plan would front on a private street which would provide access to the closest public street (Bryn Mawr Dr) and allow residents to access the location of the recreational facility; b) the emergency vehicle ingress and egress from the development would be provided through the existing roadway and this has been found to be adequate by the City of San Rafael Fire and Police Departments; c) the access and site layout has been reviewed by the appropriate City Departments and has been detennined to meet City standards; and d) ample parking facilities can be provided on the site to accommodate the 2 covered spaces and 2 guest spaces required for hillside single family residences fronting streets with less than 26 feet paved width. 6. The public health, safety and welfare are served by the adoption of the proposed PD District, in that the project as proposed and conditioned: a) would implement recreational and env ironmental goals and policies adopted for this site in the San Rafael General Plan 2020, b) would conform to City standards for safety; c) as proposed, and conditioned, it would be consistent Nvith the recommended mitigation measures presented in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for this project; and d) would address project impacts to noise, public safety, design, preservation of open space and compliance with the Hillside Guidelines through the inclusion of conditions of approval on the Environmental and Design Review Permit and "Tentative Parcel Map. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: DIVISION 1. The Zoning Map of the City of San Rafael, California, adopted by reference by Section 14.01.020 of the Municipal Code is amended by reclassifying the following real property from PD -H (Planned Development — Hillside Overlay) District to PD (Planned Development — Ordinance No. 1905 District. Said property so reclassified is located on the north side of EI Cerrito Ave, San Rafael, as shown on County Assessor's Parcel No. 01 1-121-10, as shown on the map attached as Exhibit "A". DIVISION 2. Any development of this property shall be subject to the conditions outlined Exhibit "B", the Planned Development District Standards- Unterniann Land Division - Planned Developtnenl District- Hillside Overlav which is attached hereto and made a part hereof. DIVISION 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The Council hereby declares that it would have adopted the Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase be declared invalid. DIVISION 4. A summary of this Ordinance shall be published and a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance shall be posted in the office of the City Clerk at least five (5) days prior to the Council meeting at which it is adopted. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage, and the summary of this ordinance shall be published within fifteen (15) days after the adoption, together with the names of those Councilmembers voting for or against same, in the Marin Independent Journal, a newspaper of general circulation published and circulated in the City of San Rafael, County of Marin, State of California. Within fifteen (15) days after adoption, the City Clerk shall also post in the office of the City Clerk, a certified copy of the full text of this ordinance amendment along with the names of those Councilmembers voting for or against the amendment. GARY C, PHILLIPS, Ma -or ATTEST: -5T" ,e k" EST HER C. BEIRNE, City Clerk The foregoing Ordinance Number 1905 was read and introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of San Rafael on the 4th day of June, 2012 and ordered passed to print by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Connolly, Heller, Levine, McCullough and Mayor Phillips NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None And will come up for adoption as an Ordinance of the City of San Rafael at a regular meeting of the Council to be held on the on the 181h day of June, 2012 ESTHER C. BEIRNE, City Clerk Exhibit A: PD Rezoning Map for 190 El Cerrito (APN 0 11- 121 -10) Exhibit B: Planned Development District Standards- ZJntermann Land Division - Planned Development District- Hillside Overlay Exhibit PD Rezoning Map for 190 El Cerrito (APN 011-121-10) IR2O-HI MME ME I R 177. r F w 14 mm &I Pug RRE Exhibit A- I o°,V_' Rezone AR40|)-|2|-|0 | from PD-HUnRevised PD -H Exhibit B Untermann Land Division Planned Development District — Hillside Overlay 1. Purpose of Planned Development District - Hillside Overlay The current Planned Development District — Hillside Overlay (PD -H) covers the existing single family home and associated structures and site improvements on a 6.24 acre lot, as well as allows the subdivision of the parcel into one new additional lot and creation of a single family home. The purpose of the proposed PD -H for a future 1 single family residential unit is to regulate the development of a 3.0+/- acre parcel at the end of El Cerrito Avenue. The PD -H District zoning classification will ensure the future development of the site is in accordance with the provisions of the property development regulations. The intent of the PD -H District is to accomplish the following: A. To protect public health and safety by minimizing hazards; B. To encourage preservation of natural hillside features; C. To ensure adequate emergency access by providing on-site parking; D. To implement the residential site design policies of the General Plan and the Hillside Residential Design Guidelines Manual. E. To allow in the future the addition of second units to the remaining and proposed lots. 2. Development Standards The PD -H shall be developed in conformance with the Hillside Design Guidelines, and the development plans, associated drawings and reports submitted with the PD as listed in the Exhibits and Reports sections and the development standards set forth below. A. Building Stepback 1. A 20' height limit measured from existing grade shall be observed within all areas within 15' of the maximum building envelope limit. 2. To allow for design flexibility, an encroachment into the street front, street side and interior side stepback is permitted along 25% of the building length. B. Building Setbacks 1. Setbacks shall meet City of San Rafael Hillside Development Overlay District requirements. 2. Future buildings shall be built within the proposed building envelope. and no additional setbacks shall be required. (. nterinann Land Division Fxhibit B -I Planned Development District- ffillsi,k Overlay 3. The existing house and site improvements are built within the proposed building envelope. The setback in the rear is shown as zero since existing improvements extend to the property line. Future improvements in this area will be subject to a 10' setback from the property line. C. Natural State 1. Everything outside of the proposed building envelope is to remain in its natural state, except for frontage areas where street access is to be located. 2. All areas within the proposed envelope can be disturbed pending City approval. 3. Remaining lot is to remain as is. D. Minimum Lot Area 1. Existing Lot is 6.24 acres. 2. Proposed Lots are 3.00 acres and 3.24 acres. 3. No further subdivision of parcels as shown on the Tentative Map, to allow for the creation of additional building sites shall be permitted; however, this does not preclude the minor adjustment of lot lines between adjacent parcels. E. Building Envelopes 1. Per City of San Rafael code, maximum building envelope size is 44,431 square feet (see attached Exhibit 'A' for calculations). Building envelope proposed is approximately 43,560 square feet. 2. All structures shall be within the building envelopes, per 2. B. 1 above. 3. Building Envelope of remaining parcel is 47,986 S.F. F. Area Outside Building Envelopes 1. Except as noted in F.5, no development outside of building envelope as shown on Sheet TM1 is being proposed. 2. No additional development within the remaining lot is being proposed at this time. 3. All trees within this area shall be retained unless removed for health or safety. 4. No structures, as defined in the San Rafael Zoning Ordinance, shall be permitted in this area. 5. The area between the front property line (street) and the front of the building envelope may contain minor improvements essential for: 1) vehicular access and parking; 2) pedestrian access; 3) residential services (i.e. postal mail, garbage collection); and 4) needed utility and drainage facilities. The type, design and appropriateness of any improvements on the frontage area shall be evaluated and approved through the Design Review Permit process required for the development of the single family home. G. Gross Building Square Footage 1. The maximum permitted gross building square footage of all structures will meet the requirement of Section 14.12.030(D). Untermann Land Division - Exhibit B-2 PI'Cinned Development District- Hillside Gh,erla.v 2. Square footage of existing building footprint is 4,985 +/- square feet. H. Maximum Building Height 1. Future building heights shall not exceed 30 feet as measured vertically from the existing grade to the uppermost point of the roof edge or peak, wall, parapet, mansard or other feature. 2. Chimneys are not included in height calculations. 3. Height of existing building is 18'+ Parking 1. Parking on remaining parcel allows for 2 additional spaces outside of the drive apron. 2. Two (2) additional guest parking spaces shall be provided (outside the driveway apron) as shown on Sheet TM1 and Sheet TM2 at time of future development (preliminary proposal shows four (4) spaces outside of the drive apron). J. Landscaping 1. Landscaping shall remain as is for remaining lot. 2. Landscaping shall be required for future development. 3. Planting material shall be consistent with the Hillside Design Guidelines and planting material contained in the Fire Hazard Assessment. K. Tree Removal 1. No trees are to be removed from the remaining lot per this submittal, unless removed for health or safety. 2. Tree removal within the proposed building envelope shall be kept to a minimum. Based on the proposed footprint approximately 3 trees (being a 7" Oak, an 8" Oak, and a 14" Oak) would be removed. 3. Significant trees (any tree which is in good health and form and is more than 12 inches in diameter as measured 4.5 feet above the root crown) that are removed shall be replaced at a ratio of 3 new trees for every tree removed. Minimum tree replacement size shall be 15 gallon. Exception to this requirement may be allowed by the Design Review Board (i.e. more plantings of smaller size) when site conditions warrant. L. Architecture 1. Design of current building is single story ranch style with a Mission influence. 2. Design of the future residential building shall be consistent with the requirements of the Hillside Overlay District and Hillside Design Guidelines. 3. Residential architecture shall create interest in all building facades, incorporate energy efficient design and utilize colors and materials judged compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. 4. All fencing shall be consistent with an approved fence plan. M. Soil Import/Export t -nteonann L L117d Division - Exhibit B-3 PI,Mned DL'Ve10,rMen1 District- Hidside over! n, 1 . Import or export of soil is not permitted for the subdivision improvements. Cut and fill required for the subdivision shall be balanced. Should soil import or export be necessary, the amount of imported/exported material shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. 2. The amount of import/export of fill material shall be kept to a minimum as much as possible with the development of each single family house and shall be reviewed by the Design Review Board. 3. Uses A. Permitted 1. Single Family Residential 2. Home Occupations in accordance with the City's Home Occupation regulations 3. Second Residential Units under 800 sq ft in size 4. Other accessory structures and uses customarily incidental to a permitted use and contained on the same site in accordance with Planned Development standards. B. Conditional Uses 1. Second Residential Units over 800 sq ft in size 2. Other uses allowed with a use permit in single family residential districts as specified in the San Rafael Zoning Ordinance. 4. Exhibits Exhibits on file with the Planning Department include the following: A. Average Slope and Area of Natural State Calculations (Exhibit 'A' Attached) B. Tentative Map, Sheet TM1 C. Tentative Map, Sheet TM2 5. Reports Reports on file with the Community Development Department —Planning Division include the following: A. Soils Report by GeoEngineering, dated April 29, 2009 B. Preliminary Title Report dated 6. Future Additions, Modifications and Second Units Future additions and modifications are to be submitted to the City of San Rafael Planning Department for review. This includes future "in-law" units as allowed by code. 7. Future Accessory Structures ( nterin'Inn Land Division — Exhibit B-4 Maimed Development District- Hillside 0l�erlqv A. Future accessory structures shall be contained within the building envelopes provided they are within the maximum gross building square footage. B. Future accessory structures shall be placed to the side or rear of existing or proposed buildings L nterinann Land Division - Exhibit B-5 PiUlMed Development District- [Iii1side 01'et-IL1.11 Exhibit A PD Rezoning Map for 190 El Cerrito (APN 011-121-10) Rezone APN 011-121-10 from PD -H to Revised PD -Fl Attachment Ib - Exhibit A -I /- PL/O: Exhibit B Untermann Land Division Planned Development District — Hillside Overlay 1. Purpose of Planned Development District - Hillside Overlay The current Planned Development District — Hillside Overlay (PD -H) covers the existing single family home and associated structures and site improvements on a 6.24 acre lot, as well as allows the subdivision of the parcel into one new additional lot and creation of a single family home. The purpose of the proposed PD -H for a future 1 single family residential unit is to regulate the development of a 3.0+/- acre parcel at the end of El Cerrito Avenue. The PD -H District zoning classification will ensure the future development of the site is in accordance with the provisions of the property development regulations. The intent of the PD -H District is to accomplish the following: A. To protect public health and safety by minimizing hazards; B. To encourage preservation of natural hillside features; C. To ensure adequate emergency access by providing on-site parking; D. To implement the residential site design policies of the General Plan and the Hillside Residential Design Guidelines Manual. E. To allow in the future the addition of second units to the remaining and proposed lots. 2. Development Standards The PD -H shall be developed in conformance with the Hillside Design Guidelines, and the development plans, associated drawings and reports submitted with the PD as listed in the Exhibits and Reports sections and the development standards set forth below. A. Building Stepback 1. A 20' height limit measured from existing grade shall be observed within all areas within 15' of the maximum building envelope limit. 2. To allow for design flexibility, an encroachment into the street front, street side and interior side stepback is permitted along 25% of the building length. B. Building Setbacks 1. Setbacks shall meet City of San Rafael Hillside Development Overlay District requirements. 2. Future buildings shall be built within the proposed building envelope. and no additional setbacks shall be required. Untermann Land Division — Attachment I b- Exhibit B- I Planned Developinew District- Hillside 0h'erlqv 3. The existing house and site improvements are built within the proposed building envelope. The setback in the rear is shown as zero since existing improvements extend to the property line. Future improvements in this area will be subject to a 10' setback from the property line. C. Natural State 1. Everything outside of the proposed building envelope is to remain in its natural state, except for frontage areas where street access is to be located. 2. All areas within the proposed envelope can be disturbed pending City approval. 3. Remaining lot is to remain as is. D. Minimum Lot Area 1. Existing Lot is 6.24 acres. 2. Proposed Lots are 3.00 acres and 3.24 acres. 3. No further subdivision of parcels as shown on the Tentative Map, to allow for the creation of additional building sites shall be permitted; however, this does not preclude the minor adjustment of lot lines between adjacent parcels. E. Building Envelopes 1. Per City of San Rafael code, maximum building envelope size is 44,431 square feet (see attached Exhibit 'A' for calculations). Building envelope proposed is approximately 43,560 square feet. 2. All structures shall be within the building envelopes, per 2.B.1 above. 3. Building Envelope of remaining parcel is 47,986 S.F. F. Area Outside Building Envelopes 1. Except as noted in F.5, no development outside of building envelope as shown on Sheet TM1 is being proposed. 2. No additional development within the remaining lot is being proposed at this time. 3. All trees within this area shall be retained unless removed for health or safety. 4. No structures, as defined in the San Rafael Zoning Ordinance, shall be permitted in this area. 5. The area between the front property line (street) and the front of the building envelope may contain minor improvements essential for: 1) vehicular access and parking; 2) pedestrian access; 3) residential services (i.e. postal mail, garbage collection); and 4) needed utility and drainage facilities. The type, design and appropriateness of any improvements on the frontage area shall be evaluated and approved through the Design Review Permit process required for the development of the single family home. G. Gross Building Square Footage L:'771erl77,11717 Land Division - Attachment I b- Exhibit B-2 Planned Development District- Hillside Overlgv 1. The maximum permitted gross building square footage of all structures will meet the requirement of Section 14.12.030(D). 2. Square footage of existing building footprint is 4,985 +/- square feet. H. Maximum Building Height 1. Future building heights shall not exceed 30 feet as measured vertically from the existing grade to the uppermost point of the roof edge or peak, wall, parapet, mansard or other feature. 2. Chimneys are not included in height calculations. 3. Height of existing building is 18'+ Parking 1. Parking on remaining parcel allows for 2 additional spaces outside of the drive apron. 2. Two (2) additional guest parking spaces shall be provided (outside the driveway apron) as shown on Sheet TM1 and Sheet TM2 at time of future development (preliminary proposal shows four (4) spaces outside of the drive apron). J. Landscaping 1. Landscaping shall remain as is for remaining lot. 2. Landscaping shall be required for future development. 3. Planting material shall be consistent with the Hillside Design Guidelines and planting material contained in the Fire Hazard Assessment. K Tree Removal 1. No trees are to be removed from the remaining lot per this submittal, unless removed for health or safety. 2. Tree removal within the proposed building envelope shall be kept to a minimum. Based on the proposed footprint approximately 3 trees (being a 7" Oak, an 8" Oak, and a 14" Oak) would be removed. 3. Significant trees (any tree which is in good health and form and is more than 12 inches in diameter as measured 4.5 feet above the root crown) that are removed shall be replaced at a ratio of 3 new trees for every tree removed. Minimum tree replacement size shall be 15 gallon. Exception to this requirement may be allowed by the Design Review Board (i.e. more plantings of smaller size) when site conditions warrant. L. Architecture 1. Design of current building is single story ranch style with a Mission influence. 2. Design of the future residential building shall be consistent with the requirements of the Hillside Overlay District and Hillside Design Guidelines. 3. Residential architecture shall create interest in all building facades, incorporate energy efficient design and utilize colors and materials judged compatible with the surrounding neighborhood, U17ter•tnann Land Division — Attachment I b- Exhibit B-3 Planned Development District- Hillside Over[qv 4. All fencing shall be consistent with an approved fence plan. M. Soil Import/Export 1. Import or export of soil is not permitted for the subdivision improvements. Cut and fill required for the subdivision shall be balanced. Should soil import or export be necessary, the amount of imported/exported material shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. 2. The amount of import/export of fill material shall be kept to a minimum as much as possible with the development of each single family house and shall be reviewed by the Design Review Board. 3. Uses A. Permitted 1. Single Family Residential 2. Home Occupations in accordance with the City's Home Occupation regulations 3. Second Residential Units under 800 sq ft in size 4. Other accessory structures and uses customarily incidental to a permitted use and contained on the same site in accordance with Planned Development standards. B. Conditional Uses 1. Second Residential Units over 800 sq ft in size 2. Other uses allowed with a use permit in single family residential districts as specified in the San Rafael Zoning Ordinance. 4. Exhibits Exhibits on file with the Planning Department include the following: A. Average Slope and Area of Natural State Calculations (Exhibit 'A' Attached) B. Tentative Map, Sheet TM1 C. Tentative Map, Sheet TM2 5. Reports Reports on file with the Community Development Department —Planning Division include the following: A. Soils Report by GeoEngineering, dated April 29, 2009 B. Preliminary Title Report dated 6. Future Additions. Modifications and Second Units Future additions and modifications are to be submitted to the City of San Rafael Planning Department for review. This includes future "in-law" units as allowed by code. Unterrtaarttt Land Division - Attachment 1 b- Exhibit B-4 PlannedDevelopment District- Hillside Orerlml 7. Future Accessory Structures A. Future accessory structures shall be contained within the building envelopes provided they are within the maximum gross building square footage. B. Future accessory structures shall be placed to the side or rear of existing or proposed buildings. Untermann Land Division — Attachment I b- Exhibit B-5 Plarrrred Development District- Hillside Overlav RESOLUTION NO. 13356 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL APPROVING A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP (TS11-004) AND ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT (ED11-047) FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF A 6.24 -ACRE LOT DEVELOPED WITH A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE INTO TWO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS LOCATED AT 190 EL CERRITO AVE (UNTERMANN 2 LOT SUBDIVISION) (APN: 011-121-10) The City Council of the City of San Rafael finds and determines that: WHEREAS, the existing 6.24 -acre site was subdivided from a larger 7.4 acre site in 1988 (587-13) at which time a 1.17 -acre lot now developed with 180 EI Cerrito Ave was created and the subject 6.24 acre site was created; and WHEREAS, the 6.24 subject site (7.15 gross acres) was developed with the existing single family home (190 El Cerrito Ave) based on the approval of Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED87-54) in 1987; WHEREAS, on June 23, 2011, applications requesting a Tentative Parcel Map (TS11-004) and Environmental and Design Review Permit (EDI1-047)were filed by Al Cornwell of CSW/Stuber-Stroeh on behalf of the property owners Tom and Merrie Untermann, to the Community Development Department requesting approval of a Tentative Map to subdivide the 6.24 -acre property into two lots, with the existing single family home at 190 EI Cerrito Ave remaining on a 3.24 -acre parcel (Parcel 2) and a new single family home proposed on a new 3.0 -acre parcel (Parcel 1), and an Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED11-047)and the application was subsequently deemed complete for processing; and WHEREAS, the current Planned Development (PD -H) District zoning for this site does not contain appropriate land use limitations and development standards, as required by Section 14.07.060 of the "Zoning Ordinance. PD Rezoning has been initiated to establish the required development standards for the following: a) subdivision of the one existing 6.24 acre lot into two lots (3.0 acre and 3.24 acre); b) the development of a single family home on the newly created 3.0 acre lot; and c) incorporate the existing and previously approved single family development at 190 El Cerrito Ave on the 3.24 acre lot; and WHEREAS, an accompanying application for a Planned Development Rezoning (ZC11-003) with appropriate development regulations and standards for the proposed project, has been submitted and is being processed concurrent with the Tentative Map and Environmental and Design Review Permit application, as required by the Zoning Ordinance; and WHEREAS, upon review of the applications, an Initial Study was prepared consistent with the requirements of the City of San Rafael Environmental Assessment Procedures Manual and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, finding that with mitigations, the proposed development would not result in significant environmental effects. As a result, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared and noticed for a 20 -day public review period beginning on March 22, 2012 and ending on April 10, 2012; and WHEREAS, by adoption of a separate resolution (Resolution No.: 12-03), the Planning Commission has recommended adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program to the City Council; and WHEREAS, by adoption of a separate resolution (Resolution No.: 12-04), the Planning Commission has recommended adoption of a Planned Development (PD) Rezoning request (ZC11-003) to the City Council, which would establish the appropriate development regulations and land use limitations for the new subdivision of the property and new signle family residential lot; and WHEREAS, on April 10, 2012, the Planning Commission held a duly -noticed public hearing on the Initial Study/Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration accepting all oral and written public testimony from public agencies organizations and interested parties consistent with the requirements of the CEQA; and WHEREAS, by adoption of a separate resolutions, the City Council has adoptied the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and by separate Ordinance, thee City Council has adopted the Planned Development (PD) Rezoning request (ZC11-003) to establish the appropriate development regulations and land use limitations for the new subdivision of the property and new signle family residential lot; and WHEREAS, on April 10, 2012, the City of San Rafael Planning Commission held a duly -noticed public hearing on the proposed PD Rezoning, Environmental and Design Review Permit and Tentative Parcel Map, accepting all oral and written public testimony and the written report of the Community Development Department staff. WHEREAS, on June 4, 2012, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed Tentative Map and Environmental and Design Review Permit applications, accepting all public testimony and the written report of the Department of Community Development; and WHEREAS, the custodian of documents, which constitute the record of proceedings upon which this decision is based, is the Community Development Department. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby makes the following findings to support the approval of Tentative Parcel Map JS11-004)and Environmental and Design Review Permit (EDI1-047)and for the proposed Untermann 2 Lot Subdivision project: Tentative Parcel Map (TSI1-004) Findings of Fact A. The proposed map is consistent with the San Rafael General Plan and any applicable policies, including the Fairhills neighborhood policies, as documented in the General Pian Consistency table prepared for the 190 El Cerrito Ave project, given that it implements the underlying Hillside Residential Resource General Plan land use designation of 0.2 to 0.5 units per acre (gross) density range, preserves scenic hillside open space areas with new development clustered at the base of a hill and at a similar scale to adjacent residential development, and includes a building envelope to limit area of development. B. The design and improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the San Rafael General Pian, including the Fairhills neighborhood plan policy NH -100, given that: a) review of the hillside subdivision includes an Environmental and Design Review Permit application which has been reviewed by staff, the Design Review Board and Planning Commission to assure that it satisfies the hillside subdivision criteria contained in the Hillside Design Guidelines Manual, Title 15 and Chapter 25 of the Zoning Ordinance and that the site can be developed with a structure that complies with all development standards; b) the proposed lot has been recommended as appropriate and sensitive to the hillside setting given that it clusters development at the base of the hill, includes a building envelope that is suitable for placement of a new home on the lot and preserves the visible slope from development through a proposed hillside natural state area and a new driveway that would follow the natural contour lines; and, c) a conceptual house plan was reviewed and found to demonstrate that a reasonably sized home can be built on the new parcel, as proposed, in a way which complies with the PD -H district regulations and the Hillside Development standards and guidelines without obscuring hillside resources. 2 C. The 6.24 acre property (7.15 gross acre) is physically suitable for the type or density of development that is proposed given that: a) the new lot for development would be 3.0 acre with 1.0 -acre of the lot identified as a building envelope and the remaining 2.0 acres to remain undeveloped and outside the building envelope; b) the subdivision can be accessed from the existing private roadway, El Cerrito Ave; b) the proposed density is within the maximum allowable density range established by the Hillside subdivision table 15.07.02013 which permits up to 2 units on the 6.24 acre site given the amount of land area within each of the slope ranges; and c) a soils investigation was conducted and appropriate foundation, grading and drainage improvements have been identified that would assure the site could be developed without causing soils slope stability, drainage or erosion control issues; D. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements would not cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat given that development would preserve 2.0 acres of the total 3.0 acre new lot as upland hillside slope and habitat, retaining existing wildlife corridors and vegetation, it would not alter the existing natural drainage swale nor runoff patterns downslope of the development, and would restore native plants and vegetation following completion of necessary grading and site work. E. The design of the subdivision or the type of proposed improvements is not likely to cause serious health problems given that the soils report and drainage plans have confirmed the site is suitable for residential development, there are no health hazards or hazardous uses identified on or near the site, and the subdivision would crate one new single family lot and given the limited number of residences on the private road would not create safety concerns given that traffic does not pass through the site and the project would allow only one additional single-family residence with a potential second dwelling unit to be built on the site. F. The design of the subdivision or the type of proposed improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision given that there currently are no public access easements across the property that would be affected and the existing MMWD easement would be retained and a condition of approval has been included to require the slight modification of the new lot line to maintain the easement completely within the boundaries of one of the lots and not straddling two lots. G. The subdivision of a property that gains its access through a private street is appropriate given that: a) the site is a hillside site; b) would utilize an existing private street; and c) is part of a Planned Development District. H. The project will not cause adverse environmental impacts given that a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) has been prepared for the project and reviewed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), which has resulting in mitigation measures being identified to address potential construction related air quality impacts and potential accidental discovery of cultural resources. The project also addresses safety, drainage and wildlife concerns by avoiding these through preservation and proposed design solutions incorporated in plans including a conservation area, drainage detention structures and swales. The Commission has reviewed and recommended adoption of the MND, and mitigation measures have been incorporated into the conditions of approval. Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED11-047) Findings of Fact A. The project design is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of Chapter 25, as detailed in the Zoning Compliance and General Plan compliance tables prepared for the Untermann Land Division project, and the analysis in the staff report, given that the subdivision complies with the site design, constraints, access, natural feature and drainage regulations and criteria and the Hillside Resource Residential Design Guidelines Manual (i.e., Section IV 13 Hillside Grading and Drainage; IZ:.44 Lot Configuration, Setbacks crud Locations, IVA5 Street Lnyout, Drivewav crud Parking Design and Section IV.BI Subdivisions) by placing the new lot in a comparably sized 1 -acre building envelope that is adjacent to existing development, accessed from a driveway that connects with the existing private roadway requiring minimal site disturbance, incorporating grading and drainage improvements to protect the site from erosion, and preserving the highly visible upper hillside slope in a natural state as permanent private natural state area designated as being outside the building envelope. B. The project design for the new lot is consistent with all applicable site, architecture and landscaping design criteria and guidelines for the Planned Development -- Hillside Overlay (PD -H) District given that: a) appropriate PD standards in accordance with the Hillside Design Guidelines and Hillside Overlay District were submitted and reviewed by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission and found to be consistent with the requirements and deemed appropriate for the site and its surrounding; b) a conceptual house design was submitted and reviewed by the Design Review Board on September 20, 2011 and the Board concluded that the conceptual plan demonstrated that a home could be built on the lot in compliance with the submitted PD -H District standards and the Hillside Design Guidelines and Hillside Overlay standards. C. The project design for the new lot minimizes adverse environmental impacts given that it minimizes grading by following existing contour lines, disturbing no more than 1 -acre of the site and preserving approximately 2.00 acres of hillside as permanent conservation area and would place the building envelope in an area of previously and graded portion of the site. D. The project design will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, nor materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity given that the project has been reviewed and conditioned by all responsible agencies and departments and a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared which adequately assesses the site impacts, includes all feasible mitigation measures, which have been incorporated into the project conditions of approval. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby approves Tentative Parcel Map (TS 11- 004) and Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED11-047)for the Untermann Land Division for the subdivision of the 6.24 acre lot into two lots subject to the following conditions of approval: Tentative Parcel Map (TS11-004) Conditions of Approval General and On Going Conditions 1. This Tentative Parcel Map (TSI1-004)approval shall be valid for two (2) years from approval or until June 4, 2014 and shall be null and void if a Final Parcel Map is not filed or a time extension granted prior to the expiration date. 2. Any state mandated extensions of time granted to tentative map approvals shall apply to and extend all related project development entitlements. 3. A Final Parcel Map must be processed consistent with the Major Subdivision procedures of San Rafael Municipal Code Chapter 15.02. The final parcel map filed for the project shall substantially conform to the approved Tentative Map prepared by CSWtStuber-Stroeh for Untermann Land Division, except as conditioned herein. 4. These project conditions of approval shall be included on a plan sheet to be submitted with any plans submitted to the City for building or grading permits, or subdivision improvements. 5. Hours of construction, including deliveries, arrival of workers to the site, warming -up vehicles and any noise generating activities, shall be limited to occur between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays. No work shall be permitted on Sundays or City observed Holidays. 6. The existing building envelope and all other existing easements and restrictions on Parcel Two shall remain unchanged. 7. A building envelope is established for Parcel One as illustrated on the Tentative Map to establish appropriate setbacks for the hillside property and preserve the required natural state area, which generally shall provide for a 20 -foot front yard setback, 50 -foot west side setback and 25 -foot east side setback and a 80 -foot rear yard setback. a. The building envelope shall be the same as illustrated on Sheet TM 1 of the Tentative Map plans. b. All other development restrictions of the underlying PD -H district remain applicable. c. All areas outside of the building envelope shall remain as "natural state area", with the exception of the area in front of the property, between the street (El Cerrito Ave) and the front of the building envelope, which may contain minor improvements essential for: 1) vehicular access and parking; 2) pedestrian access; 3) residential services (i.e. postal mail, garbage collection); and 4) needed utility and drainage facilities. d. The type, design and appropriateness of any improvements on the frontage area shall be evaluated and approved through the Design Review Permit process required for the development of the single family home. Prior to Recordation of Parcel Map 8. Prior to recordation of the Parcel Map, a drainage easement shall be provided over the newly created Parcel One for the benefit of drainage from Parcel Two. The easement shall encompass the exiting storm drain with sufficient width to maintain the facility. The Final Map shall be modified to include this easement. 9. Prior to recordation of the Parcel Map, Parkland Dedication fees shall be paid for I new single-family lot, in the amount of $1,987.98, in accordance with the provisions of City Ordinance 1558. Adjustments of this figure may be necessary at the time of fee payment if the fair market value for parkland and associated improvements is adjusted in accordance with Section 15.38.045 of the Ordinance. 10. Prior to recordation of the Parcel Map, the area of scenic restriction on Parcel Two as illustrated on Parcel Map (PM24-018) shall be shown on the Parcel Map for this project 11. Prior to recordation of the Parcel Map, the Parcel Map shall be modified to illustrate and define the boundaries of the building envelope. All areas outside of the building envelope to the rear and sides shall be defined as "natural state area" and the area to the front of the envelope, between the street and the front of the building envelope shall be defined as "limited natural state area". 12. Prior to the recordation of the Parcel Map, notes shall be added to the face of the Parcel Map to define the building envelope, natural state area and limited natural state area as follows: a. Except as noted below, there shall be no development outside of building envelope. No structures, as defined in the San Rafael Zoning Ordinance, shall be permitted outside the building envelope. b. All areas of the site outside of the proposed building envelope as illustrated on the Map as "natural state area" shall remain in a natural state as defined in the Hillside Guidelines. All vegetation within the natural state area shall not be changed except where restoration with the native grasses and removal of invasive, non-native species is required in accordance with project conditions, approved landscape plans and Fire management requirements. c. The area directly in front of the building envelope, between the front property line (street) and the front of the building envelope may contain minor improvements essential for: Vehicular access and parking; ii. Pedestrian access; iii. Residential services (i.e. postal mail, garbage collection); and iv. Needed utility and drainage facilities. The extent and amount of improvements in the limited natural state area shall be as minimal as possible to provide access and utilities to the site and necessary structures for enjoying of the property. The type, design and appropriateness of any improvements on the frontage area shall be evaluated and approved through the Design Review Permit process required for the development of the single family home. 13. MMWD owns and maintains water facilities within an easement in the location of the new lot line as shown on the Tentative Map a. No construction shall encroach upon or encumber access to said facilities. b. Prior to recordation of the Parcel Map, the proposed lot line between Parcel One and Parcel Two shall be modified in such a manner to not have the proposed lot line traverse through the lands of MMWD. The adjustment shall i. Maintain the facilities entirely on Parcel One ii. The proposed lot areas after the revision to the lot line between parcels shall be as close to the 3.0 and 3.24 acres as possible. iii. The proposed new lot line between Parcel One and Parcel Two shall be as straight of a lot line as possible. 14. The applicant may need to obtain a Pipeline Extension Agreement from the Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD) prior to recordation of the Final Map. Costs of extending service to the site shall be borne by the applicant, and shall be completed as part of the subdivision improvement work. Upon completion and acceptance of the facilities by the Water District, the applicant shall be eligible for water service upon request and fulfillment of the MMWD requirements. 15. The developers Civil Engineer must prepare the Final Parcel Map pursuant to procedures for Major Subdivision (Chapter 15.02) and submit 3 sets directly to the Department of Public Works for review. A copy of the Final Parcel Map and Improvement Plans shall be transmittal to the Planning Division and Building and Fire Division for review prior to being scheduled for action by the City Council. 16. Grading and Improvement Pians shall be submitted to the Planning Division and Department of Public Works prior to recordation of a final parcel map for the project, subject to the following requirements: a. Peer review of the Level B geotechnical investigation prepared for the minor subdivision may be required prior to issuance of permits, to confirm final design details. b. Grading plan check and inspection fees will be required based on the earthwork quantities. c. DPW shall notify the Planning and Building Division when the Parcel Map has been recorded. d. The applicant shall be responsible for fees and costs associated with review and recordation of the Parcel Map, including the County Recorders fees. e. The developers engineer shall submit a detailed drainage plan to DPW for review showing the proposed drainage system including layout, dimensions and details. construction details for detention box, outlet dissipater and detention pipe, SWPPP and MCSTOPP details. f. A recent Preliminary Title Report less than 6 months old will be required. Environmental and Design Review (ED11-047) Conditions of Approval This Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED11-047)approval is for the proposed hillside subdivision design consisting of the building envelope, conceptual house design, access and retaining walls as indicated on approved pians submitted for Untermann Land Division and PD Rezoning project by CSW/Stuber-Stroeh, except as modified by all conditions of approval. The Design Review Permit approves the demonstration that a new home and accessory structures can be feasibility built on the new lot within the established building envelope. 2. This approval shall be valid for two (2) years from approval or until June 4, 2014, which shall run concurrently with the Tentative Map (TS 11-004) approval, and shall be null and void if a final map is not filed and recorded or a time extension granted. 3. A separate Environmental and Design Review Permit (Zoning Administrator level with Design Review Board Review and Recommendation) is required for the residential structure and any accessory structures on Parcel One and is subject to compliance with the approved Tentative Map (TSI 1-004) approval and PD -H District standards. 4. Details for fencing, driveway and retaining walls and other improvements required for development of the site, including any incomplete subdivision approval (TS 11-004) conditions, shall be addressed and included with plans submitted for final Environmental and Design Review Permit for construction of a residence on the property. 5. Suitable all-weather driveway improvements shall be constructed before house foundation and framing work, to provide parking and staging area for construction of the house. 6. The natural state requirement established by the Hillside Guidelines for Parcel One has been addressed and achieved by the provision of the "natural state area" as shown on the Parcel Map. Therefore, the entire building envelope may be disturbed. 7. The applicant shall be responsible for the payment of the required traffic mitigation fees related to the development of the lot. The fee will be imposed as a condition of approval of the Environmental and Design Review Permit approval for the new residence and shall be required to be paid prior to issuance of a building permit for the new residential structure. This condition shall inform the applicant that the traffic mitigation fee is based on the number of dwelling units approved for the site, including the size of the new residence. The total traffic mitigation fee will be the total number of AM and PM peak hour trips generated by the proposed development on the site times the traffic mitigation fee in effect at the time of payment (Currently, the fee is $4,246 in March 2012). 8. Exterior fencing along the rear, sides and front boundary and anywhere within the "natural state area" of Parcel One shall be restricted to open wire fencing. 9. Solid 8 foot tall fencing is allowed anywhere within the building envelope or at the perimeter of the building envelope boundary. A solid fence up to 8 feet tali shall be installed to delineate and separate the area of the building envelope from the natural state area to the rear and front of the property. 10. Parking pullouts shall be incorporated into the design of the new driveway access. 11. Grade of the new driveway shall not exceed 18% slope, unless approved by the Fire Chief, and in no event should exceed 20%. 12. All proposed drainage detention and utility- improvements shall be installed below grade. 13. Proposed retaining walls shall be designed and constructed in an attractive manner, which blend with exterior building materials of proposed or future homes on the lot andlor appropriately stepped and finished to blend VA with the hillside setting. Where masonry walls are necessary for grading purposes, they shall be softened with landscaping. 14. Landscape plans shall be submitted to MMWD for review and approval prior to issuance of construction permits, and shall be designed to adhere to the water allocation issued for the site. 15. Pursuant to Mitigation Measure AQ -1, to mitigate the potential air quality impacts associated with construction and grading, prior to the issuance of building or grading permit, the project would be required to employ dust control measures through the preparation of a Dust Control Plan, which shall be implemented during all phases of grading and site construction periods when potential dust emissions are likely to occur. The plan shall be prepared and submitted to the City of San Rafael, Community Development Department for review and approval, and shall include the following measures: a. All active construction areas shall be watered at least twice daily (with recycled water, if possible). b. All inactive construction areas (previously graded areas which are inactive for ten days or more) shall be hydro seeded or covered with non-toxic soil stabilizers. c. Any exposed stockpiles of dirt, sand or gravel shall be enclosed, covered, and watered twice daily or covered with non-toxic soil binders. d. Vegetation in disturbed areas shall be replanted as quickly as possible. e. All trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials shall be covered and maintain at least two feet of freeboard. f. Wheel washers shall be installed for all exiting trucks or wash off the tires or tracks of all trucks and equipment leaving the site. g. All unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging shall be: 1) paved; 2) watered three times daily, or 3) covered with a non-toxic soil stabilizer. h. The on-site paved access road, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites shall be swept daily with water sweepers. Adjacent public streets shall be swept daily if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets. i. Sandbags or other erosion control measures shall be installed to prevent silt run-off onto public roadways. j. Windbreaks shall be installed, where necessary, at the windward side of the construction areas. k. Excavation and grading activity shall be suspended when wind gusts exceed 25 miles per hour. 1. These requirements shall be noted on the final grading plans prepared for the project or on a separate construction logistics plan submitted for review and approval by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of permits; and in. The project proponent 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. 16. Pursuant to Mitigation Measure CR -1, in the event of the accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains uncovered during site construction, including site grading and excavation the following steps shall be taken: a. There shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until: The coroner of the county in which the remains are discovered must be contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is required, and ii. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American: 1. The coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. 2. The Native American Heritage Commission shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the most likely descended from the deceased Native American. 3. The most likely descendent may make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, or b. Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance. i. The Native American Heritage Commission is unable to identify a most likely descendent or the most likely descendent failed to make a recommendation within 24 hours after being notified by the commission. ii. The descendant identified fails to make a recommendation; or iii. The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and the mediation by the Native American Heritage Commission fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner. Immediate evaluation of a discovery of historical or archaeological remains (e.g., artifacts, evidence of historic or pre -historic human activity, or human remains) shall be conducted by a qualified archaeologist. If the find is determined to be an historical or unique archaeological resource, work shall not resume in the area until the qualified archeologist has documented the discovery and made recommendations to the developer and City on implementation of additional avoidance measures or other appropriate steps to be taken in compliance with CEQA. The developer shall be responsible for the additional work required to investigate and mitigate the discovery in compliance with CEQA. Work could continue on other parts of the building site while historical or unique archaeological resource mitigation takes place. 17. No building permit shall be issued until the Parcel Map has been recorded and required improvements have been completed or appropriate security obtained to the satisfaction of all departments and agencies (i.e., Building, Fire, Planning, Public Works, San Rafael Sanitation District and MMWD). 18. The applicant apply for a new site address for Parcel One from the Community Development Department - Building Division. The new address shall be sequential and logical, following the existing street numbering pattern. The tentative address for the new single family structure shall be 151 El Cerrito Ave. 19. Address markers shall be provided during construction as required by the Building and Fire Division to assure that emergency personnel are able to identify the site. 20. Each building must 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. If new construction and substantial remodel, the address must be internally or externally illuminated at all hours of darkness. Numbers must be a minimum 4 inches with '/'2 inch stroke for residential occupancies. The address must be contrasting in color to their background SP MC 1.12.20. 21. The applicant shall pay all applicable school impact fees prior to issuance of building. Contact San Rafael City Schools for calculation and payment of fees. 22. Building permits shall be obtained for onsite improvements for the private road, including retaining walls, street lights, and private sewer systems. 0 23. Prior to any grading work and/or issuance of permits, a soils report shall be submitted to Building and Public Works addressing export, import and placement, and compaction of soils at future building pad locations based on assumed foundation design. 24. A grading permit may be required and geotechnical and civil pad certifications are to be submitted prior to building permit issuance for construction. 25. Fire Chief approval shall be required if driveway slope exceeds 18%. 26. A knox box keyed entry system is required for any gated entry. 27. This property is located in a Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) area. Provide a written Vegetation Management Plan (VMP) submitted to the San Rafael Fire Department. This VMP must be completed and verified prior o final approval. Refer to City of San Rafael Ordinance 1856 that may be viewed at www.citvfosanrafael.ori/fireve2etation, or you may contact the Fire Department at (415) 485-3309 and talk to Deputy Fire Marshall John Lippitt for any questions or comments. Requirement of continued compliance with the approve VMP must be placed within CC&R's, if provided. 28. Construction features and components of new structures on Parcel One will at the minimum meet the requirements of the California Building Code for new construction of structures within the WUI. I, Esther C. Beirne, Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of San Rafael, held on Monday, the 4th of June, 2012, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Connolly, Heller, Levine, McCullough and Mayor Phillips NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None 10 ESTHER C. BEIRNE, City Clerk CITY OF Meeting Date Agenda Item: April 10, 2012 a Community Development Department- Planning Division Case Numbers: ZC1 1-03/ED1 1-47/TS1 1-04 P. O. Box 151560, San Rafael, CA 94915-1560 PHONE: (415) 485-3085/FAX: (415) 485-3184 Project Planner: Raffi Boloyan (415) 485-30 REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION SUBJECT: 190 Ell Cerrito Ave (Untermann Subdivision) - Request for Rezoning, Tentative Map and Environmental & Design Review Permit to allow; 1) the subdivision of the single 6.24 -acre hillside parcel into two lots, with the existing single family home at 190 El Cerrito remaining on a 3.24 -acre parcel and a new single family home proposed on a new 3.0 -acre parcel; 2) Rezoning of the site from a Planned Development to a revised Planned Development to reflect the proposed project; and 3) conceptual review for compliance with hillside guidelines the design and siting for the proposed new single family residence; APN: 011-121-10; Planned Development - Hillside Overlay (PD -H) District; Tom and Merrie Untermann, owners; Al Cornwell/CSW Stuber-Stroeh, applicant; File No(s).: TS1 1-004, ZC1 1-003 D11-047 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The proposed subdivision of the 6.24 acre !hCe site would maintain the existing single family home on a 3.24 acre lot and a new 3.0 acre lot would be created for the development of a single family home. The proposed lot layout follows the neighborhood pattern and the new lot would include a building envelope to cluster the new development on the lower portion of the site, thus preserving the upper hillside area. The lot layout is logical and in keeping with this neighborhood. Although no formal approval of a specific home design is requested, the preliminary plans have demonstrated that a single family home can be built on the new lot in accordance with all the applicable hillside regulations. The DRB has reviewed the subdivision layout and conceptual home design and recommended approval. Staff recommends that the proposed subdivision and PID Rezoning conform to all General Plan, Zoning Ordinance and Hillside Design Guidelines policies and requirements. Nf'�,J �01, It �TliiM It is recommended that the Planning Commission take the following action: 1. Adopt a Resolution recommending that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program prepared for the project; and 2. Adopt a Resolution recommending that the City Council adopt a Planned Development Rezoning (ZC11-003) to rezone the property from Planned Development (PD) - Hillside Overlay (-H) District to a revised PD -H with appropriate development standards and land use regulations for the new single family lot); and 3. Adopt a Resolution recommending that the City Council conditionally approve the Tentative Parcel Map (TS11-004) with and Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED11-047) for the hillside subdivision. REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case No's: ZC1 1-0031TS1 I -004/EDI 1-047 1=101:243 Address/Location: 190 El Cerrito Ave I Parcel Number(s): Property Size: 6.24 acres(net)/7.20 (gross) acres I Neighborhood: Project Site: North: South East: West Site Characteristics General Plan Designation Zoning Designation Hillside Residential Resource (HRR) HRR HRR/Low Density Residential (LDR) Public/Quasi Public (P/QP) LDR Planned Development — Hillside Overlay (PD -H) PD 1729 Single Family Residential (R2a and R7.5) P/QP R7.5 and R20 011-121-10 Fairhills Existing Land -Use Single family residence Single family residences Single family residences Open space Single Family Residences Site Description/Setting: The project site is a partially developed 6.24 -acre parcel cont one single family home. The total gross acreage for the site is 7.15 -acres and includes 0.91- nvate easement area used as roadway and is thus included in the overall lot size forrty calculation of subdivision density 5r standards. The subject site borders City Open s t st, a portion of the Academy Heights i y that residential subdivision to the north and single -f. - front on Culloden Park Ave to the east. The project site is currently zoned a "shell" Planne-TDevelopment —Hillside Overlay (PD -H) and maintains a Hillside Residential Resource General Plan Land Use designation (0.2-.05 units/acre). The majority of the properties surrounding this site are zoned single-family residences (R7.5, R20 and R2a). The site is located at the eastern edge of the Fairhills Neighborhood, just south east of the former quarry that is currently developed as the Academy Heights subdivision. The site exhibits a steep hillside topography, with an elevation of 180 feet at the southeast corner of the site (near end of Stewart Rd) and 360 feet at the northwestern edge of the site, uphill from the single family home. The existing home is location at approximately the 275 foot elevation. The average slope for this property is 40.57%. The ridge of the hillside to the rear of this property is a visually significant ridgeline and the ridgeline is at approximately elevation 625 feet. The upper corner (northeast) of the site is the highest elevation on the property and this point is nearly 200 feet below the ridgeline above. The majority of the site, especially the upper hillside portion of the site, is characterized by a native oak woodland with species of Oak, Bay and Madrone trees. The lower portion of the subject site exhibits a flat bench area and is absent any trees or shrubs, Marin Municipal Water District owns a small portion in the center of the subject site and has various easements to serve their water distribution system. In addition, a small drainage channel runs north to south through the center of the site, near the MMWD facilities and collects and conveys run off from the hillside above. El Cerrito Ave is a private roadway that extends north off Bryn Mawr Ave. El Cerrito Ave. abuts the subject site and then turns southward and snakes around the two adjacent properties, a single family residence at 180 El Cerrito and another single family residence home (referred to as the "castle") at 185 El Cerrito Ave. El Cerrito then dead ends on the subject property. El Cerrito Ave is a private roadway that has common use amongst the three properties near the end of the road. The structure at 185 El Cerrito, the "castle", is listed on the City's Architectural/Historic Survey and is ranked as "exceptional" REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case No's: ZC1 1 -0031TS1 I -004/ED1 1-047 Page 3 The subject site is currently developed with a singe -family home that was built in the early 1990's and consists of approximately 4,800 sq ft of gross floor area. The existing structure exhibits a low scale Mediterranean design. The southern and western portions of the site are encumbered by a scenic restriction that prohibits the installation of any structures. The scenic restriction was placed on those areas at the time of the original subdivision of this property in the late 1980's. The existing home is located within a building envelope area designated for development of all structures. No structures or development is currently allowed outside the building envelope. The location of the proposed new parcel is on the western edge of the site, below and to the west of the existing single-family home. Xel gel] Me Prior to 1971, the subject properties at 190 El Cerrito Ave (6.234 acres), 180 El Cerrito (1.17 acre) and 185 El Cerrito Ave (.93 acres), were all one property. In 1971, a previous owner of the property divided it into two separate lots by deed, without a City approved parcel map as was required by the local subdivision Ordinance and State Subdivision Map Act. The deed created a 0.93 acre site that hosted 185 El Cerrito Ave and a 7.4 -acre vacant site that encompassed the remainder. This unauthorized subdivision was not discovered by the City until 1981, when applications were filed to subdivide the property. In 1982, the Planning Commission conditionally approve a two lot subdivision of the subject property, authorizing one parcel and a building pad at the north west end of the site a 4 one parcel and building .i; pad at the southeast end of the site. In order to remedy the unauthor z ivision that occurred in i' 1971, the applicants at the time agreed to include the adjacent 0.93 ail on the final parcel map. At that time, both parcels were under the same ownership. Thi Map was never recoded and thus the approval lapsed. In 1987, a new owner purchased the property and requestertificate of Compliance. This was granted in 1987. After the issuance of the Certificate of Compliance, the new owner (which is the current owner of the site), applied for and received approval of a Design Review Permit for a new single family home on the site (190 El Cerrito Ave). In 1988, an application was once again filed to subdivide the 190 El Cerrito Ave property into two lots. This subdivision was approved by the Planning Commission later in 1988 (S87-13). The Parcel Map divided a larger 7.4 acre site that surrounded the separate "castle" property into two sites, a 1.17 acre parcel (now developed With 180 El Cerrito Ave) and the subject site (developed with 190 El Cerrito Ave). At that time, the City imposed a "scenic restriction" on the south and western slope of 190 El Cerrito Ave property, restricting any structures in that area. This scenic restriction was not required on the eastern side of the property (area that is subject to the current request for subdivision) given the limited visibility of that area from off site. Following approval of the Parcel Map, the new owner of the new lot at 180 El Cerrito Ave received approval of a Design Review Permit for the design of the new structure and later built a single family home. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Two -Lot Subdivision (TS1 1-004): The project proposes to subdivide a single, 6.24 -acre parcel (7.15 gross acres) into two lots; a 3.24 acre lot (Parcel Two) and 3.00 -acre lot (Parcel One). Parcel Two would maintain the existing single-family residence and associated ancillary structures (190 El Cerrito Ave). The proposed Parcel One would be developed with a new single-family residence, potentially a detached second unit, driveway and parking areas and associated site improvements. The newly created parcel (Parcel One) would gain access from a driveway off the existing private road, El Cerrito Ave, which is an approximately 16 -foot wide roadway. Access to the existing parcel and single family home (Parcel Two) would continue to be provided by El Cerrito Ave. REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case No's: ZC1 1 -003/TSI 1-004/EDI 1-047 Page 4 As depicted on Sheet TM -1 off the project plans, a building envelope is proposed to be included on Parcel One and would encompass approximately I acre of the 3 total acre site. The building envelope is proposed to maintain a 20 foot setback at the front, a minimum 25 foot- (east) and 50 -foot (west) side setback and minimum 80 -foot rear setback. The remaining 2 acres of proposed Parcel Two outside of the building envelope would remain as natural state. All proposed development would be located lower portion of the site, within the building envelope, located below the visually significant hillside upslope portions of the site. Zone Change (ZC1 1-003): The project proposes to rezone the subject site from the current "shell" Planned Development — Hillside Overlay (PD -H) to a revised PD -H that reflects the proposed development plan. The proposed PD rezoning requests to allow an additional lot with a single family home and detached second unit. The proposed PD regulations are attached as part of the Draft PD Resolution (Exhibit 2b — Attachment B). The PD regulations establish the development standards for a Planned District and are in -lieu of the standard zoning regulations contained in the Zoning Ordinance. Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED1 1-047): Hillside subdivisions (i.e., properties with slopes over twenty-five percen;425%), or General Plan land use designation of Hillside Residential) require Environmental and D . Review Permit approval pursuant to San Rafael Municipal Code (SRMC) Section 14.25.0, k�', �V\and Section 15.07.020 (Lot Design Standards for Hillside Subdivisions). The Environmen esig"A Review Permit must be reviewed by the Design Review Board and approved by the i Commission to assure that the subdivision design complies with the General Plan crit Wa�-mented through the San Rafael Hillside Residential Design Guidelines Manual. In addlTi n, v -t though a specific home design is not n Nii required to demonstrate a conceptual siting proposed as part of this application, hillside subdivisions I and massing plan for development of a new home to allow the City to review the appropriateness of the building location, establish any building envelopes and ensure that a new structure can be built that meets all the applicable hillside standards, i.e. building height, stepbacks, gross floor area limit, natural state and general hillside design principals. The PD Rezoning requires final review and action by the City Council. Therefore, all applications, including the Design Review and Tentative Map will be acted on by the City Council after review and recommendation by the DRB and Planning Commission. The conceptual building and site layout proposed for Parcel One are presented in the project plans, and discussed further in this report. Buildinq Improvements The applicant proposes the development of a new single-family residence and a detached second unit. Conceptual plans have been prepared to illustrate how the new hillside lot could be developed. The conceptual plans show a 3 -level single-family residence and a 2 -level detached second unit within the prescribed building envelope. The building envelope is proposed to limit the siting of any new structure. The extent of the building envelope would provide a minimum of 20 foot setback at the front, 50 feet (west)/25 feet (east) to the sides, and 80 feet to the rear. The proposed PD regulations identify the maximum gross floor area for all structures on the new lot of 6,500 sq. ft., as established by the hillside guidelines. The conceptual siting of the structure and a building section are illustrated on Sheet TM2a of the project plans. Access. Circulation and Parkina Based on the conceptual plans, access to the new single family residence would extend a new 20 -ft wide driveway from El Cerrito Ave up to the building pad. This driveway would have a maximum slope of 15%. A hammerhead and parking are is at the front of the garage to the main structure. Opposite the REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case No's: ZC11-0031TS11-0041ED11-047 Page 5 hammerhead, a secondary driveway is proposed to lead to the guest parking and detached second unit. This secondary driveway would have a slope up to 20%. Pursuant to the Hillside Overlay District standards, a total of up to 6 parking spaces are required for the single family residence and second unit. Two covered spaces and two uncovered spaces for the single-family residence and up to 2 uncovered parking spaces for the second unit. The conceptual access layout is illustrated on Sheet TM2a of the project plans. Drainaae and Gradina The preliminary drainage concept is to collect all runoff from the developed site and convey it to the existing storm drain system that runs from west to east along the front portion of Parcel One and then opens up into a open drainage swale, exits the Proposed Parcel 2 and then continues to the east between two properties on the eastern side of Culloden Park Rd (62+ 58 Culloden Park Rd) and then under the road, and eventually into the creek at the rear of the properties on the west side of Culloden Park Rd.. Before the run off is collected into the on site storm drain system, the run off would be detained or dissipated on the subject site to ensure that the peak flow and volume do not exceed the existing levels. The drainage system would be designed contain the 25 -year and 100 -year runoff volumes and gradually dissipate water in a natural manner. Total cut and fill quantities of the conceptual layout include excavating 610 cy for the house, 60 cy for the driveway while filling 260 cy for the driveway and 410 cy for the site. The project would, therefore, result in balanced grading for house grading and new driveway improvements. Aside from a four -ft. tall retaining wall proposed along the garage, no retaining walls are proposed on the site. There are a few areas of the proposed lot that exceed the 2:1 slope limit. Proposed Landscaping and Associated Improvements Currently, there are no landscaping or associated improvements proposed, and only minimal tree removal would be required. Most of the area within the building envelope is previously graded and absent any trees. The conceptual footprint shown on TM2a would require the removal of t tees. It is anticipated that ornamental landscaping for yard areas around the Fuse will occur. The designated conservation area would be required to remain in its natural stat t�jlandscape plan would be mandatory as part of the formal Environmental and Design R W"mit review required for the house T by the Hillside Overlay District standards. ANALYSIS San Rafael General Plan 2020 Consistency: x As detailed in the General Plan 2020 consistency analysis (Exhibit 3), the proposed project is generally consistent with all applicable policies. The project would create a new single family residential lot for a total of two single family lots on the project site and is consistent with the Hillside Resource Residential land use designation (LU -23) and allowable density range for that land use designation which allows 0.5- 2.0 units density range. In addition, the proposed project would be consistent with the applicable policies pertaining to scenic hillside resources, seismic safety, drainage, community and neighborhood design. Policies (NH -5) and address safe street design and pedestrian safety (C-4). These policies are not directly implemented by the project given that the two -lot subdivision does not require public street improvements and would use an existing private road access which would not serve a larger residential area. In compliance with policies PR -25 and C-7, the project would be required to pay fees for its fair share contribution toward demand toward parklands (for .0075 -acres) and traffic improvements, which have been identified for build -out under the General Plan. These requirements shall be established as conditions of approval. The project would also be consistent with the one policy applicable to the Fairhills neighborhood (NH -100) in that the siting of the proposed development would match the pattern of surrounding neighborhoods and would limit development to the lower portions of the site. REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case No's: ZC1 1-0031TS1 1-004/ED1 1-047 Page 6 Zoning Ordinance Consistency: The attached Zoning Ordinance consistency analysis (Exhibit 4) shows the project complies with the applicable development standards, as follows: Chapter 7— Planned Development District Planned Development (PD) Zoning- is required for hillside subdivisions. The PD District promotes clustered development on large sites to avoid sensitive areas, and allows flexibility in property development standards. The minimum net lot area of a PD District shall be 2.5 acres, except that the minimum may be 1 acre for hillside lots where unusual site characteristics exist. The maximum number of dwelling units shall not exceed the maximum number permitted by the General Plan density for the total site area and the maximum height limit shall be as identified in the General Plan. The current "shell" PD -H was assigned to the property as part of the Zoning Ordinance update in 1991. All large hillside properties, both developed or undeveloped, were assigned a shell PD. The shell PD recognized and approved the existing development on the site at the time. However, any future change or modification to the property requires that the PD be amended. The lot size and density proposed for this project are consistent with the parcel sizes and density ranges allowed under the General Plan for the Hillside Resource Residential land use designation. The maximum height for this property would be 30 feet, as is the limit for other single family residential areas. The conceptual plan demonstrates that a reasonably sized structure could be built within the height limit. The proposed PD regulations (part of the Draft PD Ordinance attached as Exhibit 2b — Attachment B) mirror the standards that would be applicable for any hillside residential development and are similar in terms of setbacks and other development standards as any large 1 acre or 2 acre zoning (R1 a or R2a) in a hillside area. A building envelope is established and illustrated on the Tentatip _� Map and areas outside the building envelopes are to remain free of any structures. The ma�(—. �=-gross building size is established and mirror that required for any hillside development for all stfu8jae 0�1"` single property (2,500 s ft + 10% of lot size, up to a maximum of 6,500 sq ft. In this W, case, the maximum allowable size for all structures on Parcel One would be 6,500 4ft. Both staff and the DRB have recommended modification to the rilategulations to clarify what may occur outside the building envelopes. Currently, the front 20 feet of the property is outside the building envelope. However, it is highly likely that certain site improvements, i.e. driveway, retaining walls, drainage or utility improvements and ornamental landscaping may be proposed within the front area. Therefore, staff has drafted some language to include as a clarification should be considered to allow certain minor improvements, driveways, landscaping, but preclude any structures. This was also a recommendation of the DRB. Therefore, the proposed PD regulations include a recommended addition to Section 2.F of the PD language (shown in strike threugh/underline text This frontage area may be developed with limited improvements such as: 1) street access for pedestrians or vehicles such as driveway and walkway and limited retaining walls, 2) drainage and utility connections; 3) other minor incidental structures or improvements necessary to be placed at the front of the property such as mailbox, trash can enclosure, etc), 4) limited ornamental landscaping, 5) limited fencing or gates; and 6) open wire fencing. The type, design and appropriateness of any improvements on the frontage area shall be evaluated and approved through the Design Review Permit process required for the development of the single family home." Chapter 12 — Hillside Overlav Standards The Hillside Overlay Standards establish certain development standards for hillside properties, including: ® Maximum gross floor area of 2,500 sq ft + 10% of lot size, with a 6500 sq ft maximum, • Natural state requirement of 25% of lot + % slope of property, up to a maximum of 851. REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case No's: ZC1 1-003/TSI 1-004/ED1 1-047 Page 7 ® Requirement for building stepbacks on all downhill elevations and any side walls within 15 feet of any side building setback. In the stepback zone, wall height is limited to 20 feet in a single Plane and must be stepped back if exceeds 20 feet. ® Extra parking requirement on substandard streets, streets which have a paved width less than 26 feet. ® Natural Sate Requirement to preserve 251 + Yo slope of the property (to a maximum of 851) in its natural undisturbed state. • Ridgeline development prohibition to preclude any new subdivisions within 100 vertical feet of a visually significant ridgeline. As designed, this project is consistent with these standards and have been incorporated into the PD District regulations. The conceptual plan demonstrates the required parking can be provided on this substandard street. The natural state requirement for this site is 66 % (25% + 41 % avg slope) and as designed, the building envelope encompasses I acre of the 3 total acres of Parcel One, thus preserving 66% of the site as natural state. Lastly, the highest point of this property is more than 100 feet below the ridgeline, thus not subject to the ridgeline prohibition property (the highest point of site is at elevation 360 ft and the ridgeline is elevation 620 feet). Chapter 25 — Environmental and Desiqn Review Permit The following criteria have been identified as applicable to the proposed lot split: • Site Design. There should be a harmonious relationship between structures within the development and between the structures and the site. Proposed structures and site development should be related accordant to existing development in the vicinitAlThere must be a consistent organization of materials and a balanced relationship of major 4LjWtints. • Site Features and Constraints. Respect site features and nize-�site constraints by t minimizing grading, erosion and removal of natural veeNn.,Sensitive areas such as highly o - " visible hillsides, steep, unstable or hazardous sl . and drainage ways, and wildlife habitat should be preserved and respected. • Access, Circulation and Parking. The development should provide good vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian circulation and access, on-site and in relation to the surrounding area, including public streets, waterways, shorelines and open space areas. Safe and convenient parking areas should be designed to provide easy access to building entrances. Parking facilities should detract as little as possible from the design of proposed or neighboring structures. Entrances to parking structures should be well-defined and should include materials compatible with those of the parking garage. Traffic capacity of adjoining streets must be considered, • Drainage. Special attention shall be given to proper site surface drainage and an adequate drainage system. • Utility Service. Utility connections shall be installed underground. Proposed method of sanitary sewage disposal for all buildings shall be indicated. Refuse collection areas shall be screened and located in areas convenient both to users and to persons who make collections. There shall be adequate ingress and egress to all utilities. (Note: Recycling facilities must meet Standard of Resolution 93-57.) In terms of the Design Review Permit, this application before the Commission does not include a specific home design, therefore, many of the design criteria contained in Chapter 25 as well as in the Hillside Guidelines are not applicable. In hillside areas, applications to subdivide a property require either the submittal of a Specific proposal for development of a site and formal Design Review Permit application, or, at a minimum, a conceptual Design Review Permit application. The main purpose of the minimum requirement of a conceptual review is to assure that the lot layout of the proposed subdivision and siting of any building envelope are appropriate for the site and setting and to demonstrate that the lot is REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case No's: ZC1 1-0031TS1 1-004/EDI 1-047 Page 8 buildable in that future development can comply with applicable design criteria and development standards. The applicant for this project has chosen to not apply for formal Design Review Permit at this time. if the proposed subdivision and PD rezoning are approved, a formal Design Review Permit is required for any new single family home process on the property before building permits are issued and construction is commenced. Therefore, the following represents an analysis of the conceptual design of the lot layout and buildability of the lot. The neighborhood off El Cerrito Ave and Culloden Park to the west side is predominantly Single -Family Residential with R7.5, R20, and R2a Districts, ranging from 7,500 sq ft to 2 acres in size, with the exception of the subject parcel (currently zoned PD and encompassing over 6 acres. There are 6 lots to the rear of the site in the Academy Heights Subdivision that are larger in size, ranging from 2 to 7 acres in size, but are access from Twin Oaks Ave. The proposed two lots on this site, Parcel One at 3.00 acres and Parcel Two at 3.24 acres, would still be the largest lots in the immediate neighborhood off El Cerrito Ave and even Culloden Park. Development on Parcel One is proposed on only 1.0 acre of the new lot. The building envelope would accommodate a hillside home designed to step up the slope, and minimize hillside grading and impacts. Furthermore, the lot preserves the bulk of the site as open space and maintains a significant buffer'between surrounding residential properties. The applicant has demonstrated that the new lot can be development with a structure and site improvements that are consistent with the Hillside Overlay District. As illustrated on Sheet TIV12a, a conceptual plan demonstrates that a new home could be built that mess the size (6,500 sq ft), height (30' measured to peak of roof), parking (2 covered spaces and 2 gy#,Si�paces) and stepback (20 ft single wall plane) standards. Furthermore, the conceptual plan qe*ristrate that access to the site cani, , be attained with a driveway that exhibits a 10% slope, well beld�t-the 18% maximum allowed in hillside areas. In terms of retaining walls, the conceptual plan illustratps project without retaining walls to minimize the amount of grading. The only small retaining walls sho"- are at the side of the garage to the main structure where the structure is cut into the hillside. In general, the conceptual plan demonstrates that the proposed new lot could be developed with a structure and meets the applicable standards and not necessitate large retaining walls. The preliminary drainage plan is to collect all run off from the new development, treat and hold it on site and then direct it to the existing drainage facilities that traverse the adjacent properties on Culloden Park Rd. Before the drainage is discharged into the existing drainage swales, it is anticipated that some sort of detention basis or dissipater will be added to the site to meter the run off so that it does not exceed current levels in terms of volume or peak flow. As a standard City regulation, drainage improvements are required to mitigate excess runoff that will be caused by the new development. As designed and sited, it is not anticipated that the project would increase run off from this site to adjacent sites or the street . The lot would provide new water and sewer connections, which exist in the private road in El Cerrito Ave. The City Traffic Engineer has reviewed and accepted the preliminary driveway layout and access. The Public Works Department has also reviewed the conceptual drainage plans, and the sewer and water service providers have reviewed utility requirements. It may be necessary for the owners to store trash cans at the end of their driveway, or end of the private roadway during trash collection days. Both Staff and the DRB recommend that the applicant has demonstrated that that new lot and the proposed envelope are buildable with a structure that complies with all applicable development standards and consistent with the hillside guidelines. Subdivision Ordinance Consistency: The following standards apply to subdivision of the hillside site: REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case No's: ZC1 11-0031TSI 1 -004/ED1 1-047 Page 9 15.06.040.a — Lot Access This section prescribes that "Except as approved as part of a Planned Development District, established in accordance with the zoning ordinance ..., all lots or parcels created shall have frontage on a public street meeting the minimum requirements of this chapter for pavement and right of way widths. " In this particular case, staff recommends that the site is within a PD zoning and would continue to use an existing private roadway that is of sufficient size and shape to accommodate one additional residential lot. 15.07.020 Lot design standards. The maximum density allowed for subdivision and the minimum lot size and lot width are established by this slope density calculations and sliding scale contained in this section of the Subdivision Ordinance. For lots over 5 acres, the subdivider has the option of calculating the amount and location of land falling into each slope category. Based on this the slope analysis (provided in Exhibit 5b), this 7.15 acre (gross) property could yield a maximum of 2.1 dwelling units and each lot must have a minimum lot size of 2 acres and average lot width of 150 feet. A slope density analysis has been prepared to identify the amount of land area within each slope range and demonstrates the maximum density allowed on this site as 2 lots, which the project proposes. Lower densities and larger lot sizes may be required where potentially hazardous conditions or special natural features occur or, where development would be highly visible to the neighborhood or community. In this particular case, the two lots that are allowed as a maximum in this density range is recommended to be acceptable given that: a) the location of the lot and it's topography would allow any development to have minimum off site visibility; a building envelope is proposed to maintain any development at the lower portion of the new lot; c) and preliminary feasibility studies have not found any geotechnical or drainage issues with the site. The following criteria are also applicable to hillside subdivisions (1) Subdivision grading minimized; (2) Avoids highly visible hillsides and ridgeline development, (3) Preserves hillsides as visual backdrop; (4) Steep slopes avoided - (5) Clustering of development to be utilized to minimize visual impacts; (6) Tree preservation maximized; (7) Minimizes removal of natural vegetation; (8) More hazardouslunstable portions of site avoided; (9) Mitigates geotechnical site constraints or conditions when needed; (10) Buildings achieve hillside design quality; and (11) Preserves or protects unique or special natural features of the site, such as rock outcroppings, mature vegetation, landforms, creeks, drainage courses, hilltops or ridgelines. As discussed throughout this report, the proposed subdivision would be consistent with these criteria in that a building envelope is proposed at the lower portion of the site in a previously graded and less steep portion of the site. The inclusion of a building envelope would avoid steep slopes of the site, preserve the hillside as a visual backdrop and minimize grading. Furthermore, the location of the building envelope would minimize tree loss due to any development, 15.07.030 Street, driveway and parking standards. This section states that the minimum width for a public street is 25 feet and that narrower street widths can be approved when it will reduce grading impacts and the number of lots, topography, and the level of future traffic development justifies the reduction. This section further requires that each lot shall have a private driveway with a grade not to exceed 18%. Lastly, this section requires that on lots created on REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION -Case No's: ZC1 I -0031TSI I -004/ED11-047 Page 10 private streets shall provide a minimum of two (2) off-street, independently accessible guest parking places for each dwelling unit intended to be developed on the lot. These parking spaces shall not be located on the driveway apron. Staff recommends that the project as designed is consistent with these requirements in that the development would be served by an existing 16 ft wide private street and the addition of one new lot can be accommodated on the street. The conceptual plans have demonstrated that the site can be developed with a driveway with less than 18% slope and can accommodate the 2 required guest parking given. Hillside Residential Desian Guidelines Manual — Section IV.B1 (Subdivisions) The Hillside Design Guidelines Manual also have special requirements for subdivisions in hillside areas. These include: ® Preservation of Existing Natural Features. Hillside Residential Development plans should demonstrate an effort to preserve and protect significant natural features in the layout and design of streets, lots and grading patterns in subdivisions. * Street Layout and Design. Streets, driveways, parking and emergency vehicle access should be aligned to conform as closely as possible to existing grades and minimize the need for grading of slopes. 10 Hillside Grading and Drainage. Changes to existing natural t rral . n through grading should be kept to a minimum in order to preserve the inherent character' stid of sloping hillside sites. Is Lot Configuration, Building Setbacks and Locations. lis ent of Building Envelopes is a requirement on all parcels. The layout of lots sh erived from the form of the land- the development plan should adapt to existing?1t d natural features, avoiding unnecessary alteration of land forms. i r —PP Appropriate studies have been conducted to evalug&&e hillside site for geotechnical, grading and drainage and erosion control. The project has prepared a soils investigation report that was reviewed and accepted by the City Public Works Department to have adequately evaluated the potential seismic and landslide risks, and soil erosion associated with the potentially unstable slope and the site was found to be suitable for development. The development area for Parcel One has been intentionally placed at the base of the slope so as to preserve to the greatest extent the natural hillside features on the upper portions of the site. In addition, the siting of the structure at the lower portion of the site would maintain the street presence that other structures exhibit along El Cerrito Ave. A building envelope is proposed for the new lot consistent with the Hillside Design Guidelines Manual. Furthermore, nearly 67% of the site and the majority of the upslope hillside will be preserved outside the building envelope, where construction will be prohibited. The site would accommodate a house that is partially buried and steps with the natural topography of the site, thereby limiting grading to 610 cy for the new home, and 60 cy for the driveway. That earth would be retained and the grading would be balanced on site. Some restorative grading may be required upslope of the proposed driveway. This area would be required to be re -vegetated with natural grasses for slope stability. Drainage is also proposed to be collected and metered or dissipated so that the post construction outflow from the site does not exceed the flow or volume of pre -construction condition. Access to the new lot would be through the existing private roadway, El Cerrito Ave. Given the limited amount of development that uses the road, the 16 -foot wide that exists is appropriate to serve the handful of existing homes that currently use the road and the addition of the new lot. The driveway design has been evaluated to assure adequate circulation and vehicle maneuvering, Vehicles can enter and exit the site in a forward direction without being forced to back out, and that emergency vehicle access is adequately accommodated. Based on site topography, it is feasible to build a driveway with slopes less than the 18% standards established by the hillside guidelines. Again this is a REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case No's: ZC11-003/TS11-004/ED11-047 Page 11 conceptual review to show the feasibility of the proposed lot split and the design details on the final grading, driveway siting and design and building architecture siting and landscaping will be reviewed in complete detail at the time for formal design review. This project was reviewed by the Design Review Board (DRB) on September 20, 2011 (Commissioner Paul served as PC liason). There are no written minutes from this meeting given that Commission meetings are now video recorded. The video of the actual proceedings from the meeting can be viewed at www.citvofsanrafael.orq/meetings by clicking on the "video" link for the September 20, 2011 Planning Commission meeting. In summary, by a vote of 4-0-1 (Member Huntsberry absent), the DRB recommended approval of the subdivision and project to the Planning Commission and City Council. The Board supported the project as presented, finding the lot layout, building envelope logical and appropriate for the hillside site. They also found that the applicant had adequately demonstrated that the new lot could be developed with a new single family home in accordance with the hillside guidelines and standards. They did recommend that certain improvements be allowed in the front of the property, between the front building envelope and front property line, and suggested that these be defined. Staff has recommended the inclusion of the additional language to section 25 of the Draft PD to clarify the type and scope of improvements that may be installed to the front of the building envelope. Therefore, the area between the front property line and the front of the building envelope is being designated as limited natural state area." and the following clause has been added to the Section 2.F of the Draft.,PD language (Exhibit 2 —Attachment B). "This frontage area may be develope h ' ° g #improvements such as: 1) street access for pedestrians or vehicles su nveway and walkway and limited retaining walls, 2) drainage and utility connection , ) other minor incidental structures or improvements necessary to be placed at the front of the property such as mailbox, trash can enclosure, etc), 4) limited ornamental landscaping, 5) limited fencing or gates; and 6) open wire fencing. The type, design and appropriateness of any improvements on the frontage area shall be evaluated and approved through the Design Review Permit process required for the development of the single family home. " An Initial Study was completed for the project which resulted in preparation of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) on March 22, 2012. The document was prepared and circulated for a minimum 20 - day public review period in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and was provided to the Commission on March 23`d. The initial study relied upon a project specific geotechnical investigation report prepared for the site. Source references are found on page 53 of the IS/MND document. The Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration concludes the project would result in potentially significant impacts on Air Quality and Cultural Resources. Air Quality impacts are construction related and would be addressed with measures to reduce dust and fumes. Standard mitigation is recommended to address the low potential for Cultural Resources to be encountered during construction. Mitigation measures are listed in a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program prepared for the project, on pages 4 through 8 of the Untermann 2 -Lot Subdivision project Initial Study. All project impacts would be mitigated to less -than -significant levels. The project also self -mitigates its potential impacts on hillside scenic resources by clustering development at the base of the hill near existing development, and preserving 2.00 acres of the upper hillside slope as permanent natural state area. The project also self -mitigates potential drainage impacts REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION -Case No's: ZC11-0031TSI I -004/EDII-047 Page 12 by including storm drainage improvements recommended in the drainage analysis, and proposing to meet Marin County Stormwater Pollution Prevention (MCSTOPP) requirements for treatment of stormwater runoff. All final improvement plans and details would be reviewed prior recordation of a final map and/or issuance of building permits. No neighborhood meeting was held for the proposed project. Notices were mailed to all property owners and residents within 300 feet of the project site as well as the Culloden Park/Twin Oaks Homeowner's Association, 15 days prior to the Design Review Board meeting and 20 days in advance of this Planning Commission hearing (Exhibit 6). In addition, the site was posted with notice of this meeting 15/20 days in advance each meeting. To date, no written comments have been received regarding this project. Staff has fielded three verbal inquiries about the project from surrounding neighbors. Two of the phone calls were prior to the DRB meeting and were concerns/inquiries about drainage and traffic intensification from the new subdivision and second unit, and speeding on El Cerrito Ave. The one phone call received prior to this Planning Commission hearing was from a neighbor on Bryn Mawr Dr. asking rithis project would impact their home. No written comments of verbal comments have been rec6v4d1on the Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration from any neighbors or outside agencies= OPTIONS The Planning Commission has the following options. ----- 1 . Recommend approval of the applications as presented (staff recommendation) 2. Recommend approval of the applications with certain modifications, changes or additional conditions of approval. 3. Continue the applications to allow the applicant to address any of the Commission's comments or concerns 4. Recommend denial of the applications and direct staff to return with appropriate Resolutions. 1. Vicinity/Location Map 2. Draft Resolutions a. Draft Resolution Recommending Adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and MMRP b. Draft Resolution Recommending Adoption of the Planned Development Rezoning c. Draft Resolution Recommending Approval of Tentative Parcel Map and Environmental and Design Review Permit 3. General Plan 2020 Consistency Table 4. Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table 5. Application Materials a. Letter from applicant, June 16, 2011 b. Calculation of Average Slope and Slope Density Analysis Table 6. Public Hearing Notice 7. Reduced project plans (11"x 17" plans distributed to the Planning Commission only) Draft Initial Study/Draft Minted Negative Declaration (Previously distributed to the Planning Commission at the start of the public notice period) Nv`. scNJ-- vo Boa �11 t)oAri 1J-OAI' 1114 3'a �"- VL c' j��ibW- - r -T 4 Li scNJ-- vo Boa �11 t)oAri 1J-OAI' 1114 3'a �"- VL c' j��ibW- - EXHIBIT 3 TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020 —190 EL CERRITO AVE LAND USE ELEMENT LU -8. Density of Residential Development. Residential densities are shown in Consistent Exhibit 11, Land Use Categories. Maximum densities are not guaranteed but The site has a Hillside Residential Resource General Plan Land Use designation, which allows densities of minimum densities are generally required. Density of residential development on any between 0.2 and 0.5 units per gross acre. Based on this density, the 7.15 acre site (gross acreage, including the site shall respond to the following factors: site resources and constraints, potentially portion of the private roadway) would be allowed between 1-2 units. The project proposes a total of 2 units and hazardous conditions, traffic and access, adequacy of infrastructure, City design would therefore be consistent with the allowable density range. policies and development patterns and prevailing densities of adjacent developed areas. 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 envisioned by General Plan policies. (See Exhibit 11). 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 The Hillside Residential Resource land use designation is characterized as areas having very steep slopes which have geologic or seismic constraints and may have community wide visual significance. This designation is typical of sensitive hillside areas. Residential development is considered appropriate, if sensitively designed to consider its hillside setting. The project concentrates proposed additional development to lower, disturbed areas of the site and adjacent to existing residential development, with the upper hillside slopes preserved in private open space. Furthermore, the new lot would be on a portion of the site that has limited visibility from downtown and the south side of the valley. Appropriate geologic and seismic feasibility studies have been prepared and revealed that the site is suitable for development. Therefore, the project is consistent with this policy. Consistent The project meets the housing element by implementing the minimum density range established for the hillside site. H-2. Neighborhood improvements. Recognize that construction of new housing Consistent can enhance a community. Encourage investment in housing that adds to the The project must obtain an Environmental and Design Review permit for construction of a new home and comply appearance and value of a neighborhood. with the hillside design guidelines. This would assure a high quality home is constructed that incorporates appropriate hillside materials. H-3. Design That Fits into the Neighborhood Context. Design new housing, Consistent remodels and additions to be compatible in form to the surrounding neighborhood. The new lot proposes a building envelope (as required for hillside subdivisions) and development is located Incorporate transitions in height and setbacks from adjacent properties to respect adjacent to existing residential lots. The building area and setbacks proposed are comparable to surrounding adjacent development character and privacy. Respect existing landforms and residences and preserve upper hillside landforms. The building envelope proposed on the new lot would restrict minimize effects on adjacent properties. the location of any new structure to the lower portions of the site and does not extend significantly higher than, nor conflict with surrounding development patterns south, east and west of the site. H-4. Public Information and Participation. Provide information on housing Consistent programs and related issues. Encourage and support public participation in the Plans were referred to the Culloden/Quarry/Twin Oaks HOA in June 2011 since they are adjacent to the project formulation and review of the City's housing policy, including encouraging site. Notices of the project were mailed to interested agencies and homeowners within 300 -feet of the site. A neighborhood involvement in development review. Work with community groups to publicly noticed hearing was held before the Design Review Board on September 20, 2011, resulting in no public advocate programs that will increase affordable housing supply and opportunities. comments from neighbors. No specific neighborhood design issues have been raised. Notices have also been Ensure appropriate and adequate involvement so that the design of new housing will mailed to property owners and residents within 300 feet of the site, 20 days in advance of the April 10, 2012 strengthen the character and integrity of the neighborhood. Planning Commission hearing on the Draft Initial Study and project applications. H-18. Adequate Sites. Maintain an adequate supply of land designated for all types Consistent of residential development to meet the quantified housing need for San Rafael. Within The site is designated for extremely low density hillside residential development, which is proposed for the site. this total, the City shall also maintain a sufficient supply of land for multifamily housing The Hillside Resource Residential General Plan land use designation is the lowest residential density designation to meet the quantified housing need of veru low, low and moderate income housing in the City of San Rafael. As proposed, the project would be within the allowable densitv ranges for this Exhibit 3 -1 tlntermann 2 Lot.Subdii,ision File #: ZCII-003/TSII-004/ED71-017 190 h7 Cerrito Ave Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table EXHIBIT 3 TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020 —190 EL CERRITO AVE units. H-19. Inclusionary Housing Requirements. Require residential projects to provide a percentage of units for below market rate (BMR) housing, as indicated below. Provide units affordable at below market rates 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. Specific requirements are: • 10% for development with 2 — 10 Housing Units NEIGHBORHOODS ELEMENT NH -1. Neighborhood Planning. Engage neighborhood associations in preparing neighborhood plans for their area. NH -2. New Development in Residential Neighborhoods. Preserve, enhance and maintain the residential character of neighborhoods to make them desirable places to live. New development should: • Enhance neighborhood image and quality of life • Incorporate sensitive transitions in height and setbacks from adjacent properties to respect adjacent development character and privacy • Preserve historic and architecturally significant structures • Respect existing landforms and natural features • Maintain or enhance infrastructure service levels • Provide adequate parking designation. Therefore, the project would be consistent with the General Plan 2020 and would not reduce the City's supply of land designated for housing development. Consistent The 2 lot subdivision project results in 1 additional unit and is not subject to this requirement. Consistent The project is in the Fairhills neighborhood area which contains specific policies in the General Plan. No specific neighborhood plan has been prepared. Consistent The project has been designed to create a new single family residential lot adjacent to existing residences, located at the lower portion of the site, and preserving the upper hillside slope within a permanent private conservation restriction. The building envelope is approximately 1 acre of the proposed new 3 acre lot and is similar in scale to adjacent lots. The application does not include a specific request for approval of a home design. However, given that this is a hillside side, the city does not allow a hillside subdivision without a demonstration that in concept a new home can be built on the site and comply with all hillside guidelines and standards (height, size of building, parking, stepbacks, etc). There are no historic structures on the site. However, there is a historic structure listed on the City's local historic inventory on an adjacent property (185 EI Cerrito Ave). Given the topography and separation between the new building site and 185 EI Cerrito Ave, this subdivision would not affect the historic structure. The project appears to be consistent with this policy. NH -3. Housing Mix. Encourage a housing mix with a broad range of affordability, Consistent character, and sizes. In areas with a predominance of rental housing, encourage The project proposes additional single-family residential housing consistent with the desired density and land use ownership units to increase the variety of housing types. designation of the site. In addition, the site could accommodate a second dwelling unit. Second dwelling units are not counted towards density, and are allowable uses in all single family areas. NH -5. Safe Streets. Provide neighborhood streets that are safe, pleasant, and Consistent attractive to walk, cycle and drive along. The project would utilize an existing private road and additional road widening and upgrades have not been deemed necessary. The existing private street at EI Cerrito Ave is currently approximately 20 feet wide and does not include sidewalks. The project may be deemed consistent with this policy, particularly given that the private road is not a through street, serves a limited number of 12 single-family residences and does not require road improvements. Of course, improvements to upgrade the private roadway would also be consistent with this policy. NH -6 Bicycle and Pedestrian -Friendly Streets. Create bicycle and pedestrian Consistent friendly residential streets with large street trees, sidewalks and other appropriate As discussed above, no improvements for the existing private road serving this lot are deemed necessary. The amenities. private road connects with a fully improved public roadway at Bryn Mawr Dr, which is within 350 feet of the proposed driveway to the new lot. Given the limited private residential use of the property, with no public Exhibit 3 -2 11niermann 2 Lot Subdivision File 4: ZCI1-003/TSII-004/EU11-047 1901,'/ Cerrito Ave Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table EXHIBIT 3 TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020 -190 EL CERRITO AVE NH -7. Neighborhood Identity and Landmarks. Enhance neighborhood identity and sense of community by retaining and creating gateways, landmarks, and landscape improvements that help to define neighborhood entries and focal points. NH -100. New Development. Retain the existing character of the neighborhood, including both historical homes and the natural setting by Maintaining the authentic historic value and ambiance of the neighborhood's older housing; Assuring that new development and significant remodeling respect and enhance the character of the shrouding housing; and Protecting hillside areas by clustering new development where appropriate to maximize open space preservation and by carefully evaluating the location, size and height of new structures, road design and adequacy for safety of vehicles, grading, structural foundations, surface and sub soil drainage, excavation, earthfills and operations in order to avoid buildings which are excessively visible or out of scale, soil erosion, scarring of the natural landscape , obstruction of scenic vistas from public vantage points or loss of natural vegetation and wildlife habitat. 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 -1a. Gateway Enhancements. Fund gateway enhancements. CD -1 b. Finer Grain Design Qualities. Develop neighborhood or corridor plans to identify more detailed design qualities and elements. CD -1c. Way -Finding Signage. Prepare and implement an attractive citywide way -finding sign program to direct people to the City's cultural resources, public facilities, parks and other important destinations. 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. 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. 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 lInterniarnr 2 Lot .Subdivision 190 F.I t 'errito : l ve improvements required, the development may be considered consistent with this policy. Consistent (Not applicable) The project is not located at a gateway or neighborhood entryway. Consistent The Fairhills neighborhood is an essentially built out neighborhood. The primary land use in the Fairhills neighborhood is single-family residential. As discussed above, the proposed new home -site is located in an area that would not be visible from key public vantage point in downtown or along the hills on the south side of the valley. Furthermore, on the new home site, the proposed envelope would cluster the new structure at the base of the site and thereby below the natural hillside setting on the upper portions of the site. The adjacent historic structure, (castle at 185 EI Cerrito Ave) is identified on San Rafael's historical survey, but would not be adversely affected by the proposed development given the separation and topography of the structure and the proposed new lot. Therefore, the project is considered to be consistent with this policy. Consistent As discussed above, the project would preserve the open space hillside, is not a neighborhood entryway, and would not affect historic resources. Consistent As discussed, the proposed residential home would be compatible with the adjacent detached single family residential development, and is in keeping with the General Plan 2020 land use designation and Fairhills neighborhood. Consistent The project is within the Fairhills neighborhood and consistent with the neighborhood scale and pattern. Exhibit 3 -3 proposes single-family development, which is entirely File #: ZCI I-0031TSI I -004/EDI I -047 Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table EXHIBIT TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2W20-190 ELCERRITO AVE neighborhoods. CD -5. Views. Respect and enhance to the greatest extent possible, views of the Bay Consistent and its islands, Bay wetlands, St. Raphae|'schurch bell tower, Canolfrnm.marinas, This proposed project would not have a significant impact on views of the hills and ridgelines that are located Mt. Toma|pais.Marin Civic Center and hills and hdgo|inesfrom public streets, parks north of the proposed development given that the house would not block a significant portion of the hillside or and publicly accessible pathways. silhouette above the ridge. The proposed project has demonstrated that it could be built within the 30 -ft height limit established for the site and within the context of the surrounding development. Furthermore, on September 20, 2011 the Design Review Board reviewed the proposed project and concluded that, as proposed, the subdivision layout and conceptual home design are appropriate for this hillside setting and would be consistent with the pertinent design policies. CD -6. Hillsides and Bay. Protect the visual identity of the hillsides and Bay by Consistent. controlling development within hillside areas, providing setbacks from the Bay, and As discussed above,project clusters the new development of a scenichillside and preserves the providing public access along the Bay edge. upper hillside slope as permanent private open space. The topography of the area, the location of the new lot and CO-6u.Hillside Design Guidelines. Continue hoimplement hillside design the siting of the proposed building envelope are such that the development would not be visible from other public guidelines through the design review process. Update the guidelines ao vantage points within San Rafael (except from E|Cerrito Ave) needed. CD'Gb.Wetland Setbacks. Continue ooimplement the wetland setbacks addressed in Policy CON -4 andi the zoning ordinance. CD-6cPublic Access Opportunities. Continue mevaluate public access opportunities txmuohthe development review process. oD-13. Single -Family Residential Design Guidelines. Recognize, preserve and enhance the design elements that contribute to the livability of neighborhoods and their visual appearance. Recognize that each neighborhood is unique, and that design review must consider the distinct characteristics of individual neighborhoods. Develop design guidelinestoensure that new development fits within and improves the character -defining elements ofneighborhoods. CD4aParticipation inProject Review. Provide for public involvement mthe review of new development, renovations, and public projects with the following: a)design guidelines and other information relevant mthe project asdescribed inthe Community Design Element that would baused byresidents, designers, project developers, City staff, and City decision makers; U)distribution ofthe procedures of the development process that include the following: submittal information, timelines for public review, and public notice requirements; c)standardized thresholds that state when design review of projects is required (e.g. residential conversions, second- storyagdidpns);angg)effectwenvb|icpaxidpwhoninthonwiewpmceos. CIRCULATION ELEMENT C-4.Safe Roadway Design. Design ufroadways should uosafe and convenient for motor vehicles, oonoh bicycles and pedestrians. Place highest priority onsafety. |n order »nmaximize safety and multimodal mobility, the City Council may determine that an intersection is exempt from the applicable intersection level of service standard where it is determined that a circulation improvement is needed for public safety considerations, including bicycle and pedestrian safety, and/or transit use improvements. C-4a.Stme Pattern and Traffic Flow. Support efforts uythe City Traffic Engineer uvconfigure orre-configure street patterns snpotoimprove traffic flow and turning movements inbalance with safety considerations and the desire not towiden roads. Consistent The project has been reviewed by the Design Review Board on September zU 2811 recommended as consistent with the Hillside Design Guidelines and the San Rafael Design Guidelines. The Board recommended approval of the building envelope and setbacks which were considered appropriate and would assure development was compatible with the adjacent homes. Final design review approval of the house is required to assure the design will comply with the Hillside Design guidelines. Consistent The application was referred mthe surrounding neighborhood and interest gmups Notices pfpublic hearings were mailed toall property owners, neighborhood groups andinterested parties within 3OOfeet ofthe project site informing them of the proposed project and all public meetings. In addition, the site was posted with notice of all public meetings oothis proposed project, Consistent. The project utilizes an existing private roadway that connects to a fully improved public street (Bryn Mawr Dr Lome)The City may approve alternative street designs for hillside development. The construction ofone additional single-family residence would not contribute significant additional traffic nor increasetrips that would exceed LOS standards at nearby intersections (i.e., Bryn Mawr Dr/Mission Ave; Bryn Mawr Dr/Culloden Park Rd orCulloden Park Rd/Forbes xvw.) Exhibit 3-4 O"armum/2LmJxhdi,*mv File #: 7 -C// -003/T,51/ -0041E3)//-047 /9V8Cerrito Jvc Title: General Plan 200Consistency Table EXHIBIT 3 TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAELGENERAL PLAN 2020-190BLCERRITO AVE C-4uStreet Design Criteria mSupport Alternative Modes. Establish street design criteria mthe extent permitted byState law msupport alternative transportation modes mbetter meet user needs and minimize conflicts between oonpe*ingmoden. C'4u.Appropriate LOS Standards. At the time City Council approves a roadway improvement and safety exemption from the applicable LOS standard, the appropriate LOS will beestablished for the intersection. C-5. Traffic Level nfService Standards. A. Intersection LOS. |norder tnensure aneffective roadway network, maintain adequate traffic levels of service (LOG) consistent with standards for signalized intersections inthe A.M.and P.M.peak hours ooshown below, except aaprovided for under (B) Arterial LOS. C-7. Circulation Improvements Funding. Take astrong advocacy role in securing funding for planned circulation improvements. Continue mseek comprehensive funding that includes Federal, State, County and Redevelopment funding, Local Traffic Mitigation Fees and Assessment Districts. The local development projects' share n/responsibility mfund improvements iobased on: (1) the generation of additional traffic that creates the need for the improvement: (2) the improvement's role in the overall traffic network; (3) the probability of securing funding from alternative sources; and (4)the timing cxthe improvement. C-26. Bicycle Plan Implementation. Make bicycling and walking enintegral part or daily life inSan Rafael by implementing the San Rafae,nBicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, C-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. maddition tupolicies and programs outlined inthe Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan, provide support for the following programs: C-28. Urban Trail Network. Encourage identification, renovation and maintenance of an urban trails network throughout San Rafael to encourage walking and appreciation n,historical and new pathways. u-%8aUrban Trail Network Project. Prepare aplan tuinclude umap and descriptions of existing and potential urban trails in San Rafael. Urban trails tn»eidentified include, but are not limited to, historic neighborhood stairways and walkways, Downtown alleyways, park pathways, and cmeksioepaths. The document should identify enetwork nfcunneodng pathways that can bepromoted for walking enjoyment, and means m preserve and maintain thnsopatha. INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENT 1-2. Adequacy of City Infrastructure and Services. Assure that development can be adequately served by the City's infrastructure and that new facilities are well planned and well designed. Consistent Development ofone i le-fanilynmmenoowmumgonerateuppnmimately 1eM.and 1P.M. peak hour trip. The LOS D standard is established for nearby intersections. The project has been reviewed by the City Traffic Engineering Division and the additional peak hour trips would not cause the LOS D threshold to be exceeded. Therefore, the proposed project would beconsistent with this policy and the fee would berequired 0obnpaid prior missuance ofabuilding permit for the new home Consistent with condition Anpart nfthe General Plan 2O2O.circulation improvements necessary |omaintain LOS standards, improve safety and relieve congestion in San Rafael were identified. To help fund these improvements, all development projects that generate additional A.M. or P.M. peak hour trips must pay Vraffic mitigation fees. This project wouldbe required to pay mitigation fees for 2 additional peak hour trips, in the amount of $8,492.00 ($4,246.00 x 2 trips) prior missuance ofobuilding permit for the new home. Consistent There are no portions of the San Rafael Bicycle and Pedestrian MasterPlan that are applicable mthis site. Consistent� See C-26 above Consistent The subject site is surrounded by private property and does not directly border public open space. This site is not currently a designated connection point by the General Plan. Consistent The public utility agencies that would provide water, sewer and other services mthe site have reviewed the proposed project and determined that there isadequate capacity mservice the new project. The site would require extension of water service to the new huuoo, and development would connect to existing sewer lines. Utilities are located within the private driveway and extend downhill to existing public systems in El Cerrito Ave and further downhill. The water agency, MwxND.has indicated that the design ofthe new lot line would need tobe modified slightly mnot bisect ooexisting facility and easement that exists onthe site. This slight modification will be included as a condition of approval. Drainage would discharge through existing private mpm"emonts, and based on city ordinances and the preliminary drainage study, the amount and rate of discharge would not be Exhibit j-5 /�ntcnx000JLot Subdivision File 4: 2C1/-003/TS//-004/5D//-047 EXHIBIT 3 TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAELKSENERAL PLAN 2020-190 ELCERRITO AVE 1-4. Utility Undergrounding. Continue mpursue theundergmwnding of overhead utility lines. PARKS AND RECREATION Ultimately, drainage connects with storm drainage infrastructure in Culloden Park Rd which runs in open and closed systems parallel toFairhUbAve ands Mission Ave. There are nninfrastructure u, capacity issues with sewer, water and stormdrainage systems downstream of the site. Consistent with Condition The site is already served by utilities and a based on City new utility connections would berequired m be undergrounded. A condition of approval has been added to require this undergrounding. -PR-25. Contributions by Ownership Residential Development. Require developers o*new residential housing mprovide for the The project will pay its fair share contribution to parklands in accordance with Title 15 of the San Rafael Municipal recreational needs v(future residents ofthat development inaccordance with Code; which implements this policy and the Quimby Act. Recreation Element standards and Quimby Act Subdivision Parkland Dedication Requirements. Needs would besatisfied bythe dedication ofland and development mrecreation facilities ,oserve the new residents. In -lieu fees will uerequired ifa finding is made that dedication and development ofparkland isnot afeasible n, appropriate option. PR-2aa.Parkland Dedication Ordinance. Maintain and update o» necessary the Parkland Dedication Ordinance. S-1. Location of Future Development. Permit development only in those areas Consistent where potential danger mthe health, safety and welfare of the residents of the A GeotechniGal Feasibility Report has been prepared for the site in compliance with the Geotechnical community can ueadequately mitigated. Review process, and found that the project would not pose potential danger to the health, safety and welfare of the community. The report identifies that the site issuitable for subdivision and development with eresidential structure. S-3.Use vfHazard Maps inDevelopment Review. Review Slope Stability, Seismic -C6vsJ stent � Hazard, and Flood Hazard Maps at the time adevelopment iuproposed. Undertake The Geology and Stability Map and Flood Hazard Area Maps of the General Plan, Exhibits 27 and 29, were appropriate studies massure identification and implementation ofmitigation reviewed and hwas determined that based onthese maps, the site ks not located inu10OYaorflood hazard area measures for identified hazards. and located in an areas that hosts Franciscan Melannge. A Geotechnical Feasibility Study was prepared, and reviewed by the Department of Public Works, and concluded to adequately assess the site conditions. S*Geotechnical Review. Continue mrequire geotechnical investigations for development proposals as set forth (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 S-5. Minimize Potential Effects unGeological Hazards. Development proposed within areas vfpotential geological hazards shall not beendangered by, nor contribute to, the hazardous conditions vnthe site nronadjoining properties. Development inareas subject tnsoils and geologic hazards shall incorporate adequate mitigation measures. The City will only approve new development mareas ofidentified hazard xsuch hazard can heappropriately mitigated. S's.Seismic Safety ovNew Buildings. Design and construct all new buildings tv resist stresses produced byearthquakes. The minimum level ufseismic design shall be in accordance with the most recently adopted building code as required by State Consistent with conditions The Department of Public Works has concluded that the level of investigation performed for the additional residence is adequate and appropriate to confirm the suitability o[site do"e|upmon6, proposed construction techniques and develop final foundation and retaining wall solutions. Consistent with conditions The above-mentioned Geotechnical Investigation Report found that the proposed development was feasible from ageotechnical standpoint and standard geotechnical recommendationswere identified Voensure the potential hazards would not endanger the proposed development. Consistent The proposed project would entail all new construction and would be built in accordance with the most current building and seismic codes as required by the City's Municipal Code. Exhibit J-6 (/xmnxmm2 L.x3vb6v,io// File 4: ZC//-V03Y73//-0V41EJ7//-047 /Y0lJCerrito ./``^ Title: General Plan 2020Consistency Table EXHIBIT 3 TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020-190 ELCERRITO AVE law. S-12.Use cf Environmental Databases inDevelopment Rovmw. Review the San Consistent Rafael Fire Department's database of contaminated sites at the time a development is Review of state Geotracker and listed hazardous waste sites show no such sites are located in the vicinity. proposed. Undertake appropriate studies to assure identification and implementation Additionally, the Fire Department has reviewed the list of contaminated site and this site imnot included nnthe list. ofmitigation measures for sites nno,near identified hazards. mofurther studies o/action iorequired. S1r.Flood Protection ofNew Development. Design new development within the bay mud areas to minimum floor elevation that provides protection from potential impacts mflooding during the 00-ye*rflood. The final floor elevation (elevation of the first floor at completion of construction) shall account for the ultimate settlement of the site due mconsolidation ofthe bay mud from existing and new loads, taking into account soils conditions and the type nfstructure proposed. Design for settlement over aoQyearperiod istypically considered sufficient. S-1VStorm Drainage Improvements. Require new development toimprove local storm drainage facilities maccommodate site runoff anticipated from o^1OO-year, storm. s48a. Storm Drainage Improvements. Require that new development proposals which are likely tnaffect the limited capacity ofdownstream storm drainage facilities provide ahydrological analysis ufthe storm drain basin ufthe proposed development and evaluate the capacity ofexisting downstream storm drainage facilities and fund improvements m accommodate increased drainage from the project site resulting from u 1O0-yea,storm, where practical. S-22. Erosion. Require appropriate control measures in areas susceptible to erosion, mconjunction with proposed development. Erosion control measures and management practices should conform tothe most recent editions ofthe Regional Water Quality Control Board's Erosion and Sediment Control Field Manual and the Association ofBay Area Governments' Manual v/Standards for Erosion and Sediment Control urequivalent. S -22a. Erosion Control Programs. Review and approve erosion control programs for projects involvinggrading one acre ormore o/5.0O0square feet o[built surface aarequired byStandard Urban 0onnwamr Management Plans (GuSUMP).Evaluate smaller projects onacase-by- case basis. ase-uy'cmseboaia. S-2ub.Grading During the Wet Season. Discourage grading during the wet season and require that development projects implement adequate erosion and/or sediment control and runoff discharge measures. e'2s.Regional Water Quality Control Board (RxxQoB)Requirements. Continue mwork through the Marin County Otunn*moorPollution Prevention Program to implement appropriate Watershed Management plans asdictated inthe RVvOCB general National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit for Marin County and the local stormwater plan. Consistent The subject site is not located in the 100 -year flood zone and would be required to be constructed in accordance with Chapter 18 of the City's Municipal Code Consistent. At the time of the development of the structure, the project would be required minclude on-site retention, swales and improvements to contain storm runoff and discharge water in an appropriate manner. The location and size of the facilities would depend on placement of the structure and would be therefore evaluated as pan of the Design Review Permit process required for the new home. Final grading and improvement plans will ba required that include these details. Consistent with conditions Erosion control and storm~ate,pollution prevention plans are required as a condition of development. Consistent with condition This project has been reviewed bythe City's Public Works Department which implements the Gtormwater Pollution Prevention standards and regulations. As designed, the proposed project includes adequate measures to reduce stormwater run-off consistent with the standards established by the RWQCB. The project would direct all run-off to the landscape areas and on-site filtration devices, before being discharged into the City's stormdrain system. Astandard condition nfapproval would require the applicant tusubmit uStorm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for review and approval by the City of San Rafael Public Works Department prior to the issuance ofbuilding permits. S-26.Fire and Police Services. Maintain adequate cost-effective fire protection, 66�si stent"xthvnnditims - paramedic and police services. Minimize increases in service needs from new The City of San Rafael Police and Fire Departments have both reviewed the proposed project and certain development through continued fire prevention and community policing programs, conditions ofapproval mensure that the new development would comply with their regulations and standards. The Fire Department has found that the proposed subdivision layout would comply with all Fire Codes. More opocifiomquimmentsfo[dovempmantof/xeoioawithastmctvmwi}|bomquimUa|thetimovfeviewofthe Exhibit 3'7 /In^,,ouvoJLot Subdivision /o0LlCerrito Ave File 4: %C/I-00317S//'0041ED//-047 Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table EXHIBIT 3 TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020-190 EL CERRITO AVE design level plans for the new home and recommended conditions of approval would be required to ensure inclusion nffire sprinklers and avegetation management plan. S-31. New Development in Fire Hazard Areas. Design new development located on Consistent with conditions or adjacent mnatural hillsides oominimize fire hazards mlife and property. According mthe Fire Department, the subject site is located mahigh fire hazard area and would bosubject m compliance with the wildland urban interface (WUI) zone. Landscape and building plans would be subject to review to assure plant species, building techniques and vegetation management are correctly implemented for the zone. More specific review ofthis will borequired aupart ofthe formal design review process when the specific home design wsubmitted for review and approval. S-32. Safety Review ufDevelopment Projects. Require crime prevention and fie Consistent prevention techniques innew development, including adequate access for emergency See S-28above. NOISE ELEMENT N-1.Noise Impacts unNew Development. Protect 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 ofaproject based on noise exposure, 0aproject exceeds the standards }nExhibit 31.anacoustical 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. w-8.Nuisance Noise. Minimize impacts from noise levels that exceed community sound levels. N-9aEnforce and Update the Noise Ordinance. Enforce and update, an necessary, the City's Ordinance that addresses common noise nuisances including amplified music, outdoor mechanical equipment and construction activities. w-1uu.Mitigation for Construction Activity Noise. Through environmental review, identify mitigation measures mminimize the exposure pfneighboring properties toexcessive noise levels from construminn'm|omuamivity. N-10cNoise Specifications. Include noise specifications inrequests for equipment information and bids for new City equipment and consider this information anpart ofevaluation nfthe bids. N -10d. San Rafael Rock Quarry. Seek tuminimize noise impacts of the quarry and brickyard operations through cooperative efforts with the County o/Marin through its code enforcement and land use entitlement processes. OPEN SPACE OS4.Open Space Preservation. Preserve, through nvariety ofmethods, the open space areas identified mthe Inventory ofPotential Open Space Sites (See Appendix V.Retain and protect open space areas that serve aodelineators between neighborhoods and between wdjaonntcommvnitiem.asw/|d|m*oabixat.undasvieua| assets for the community. Open space areas can also function usconnections between neighborhoods, for example with the creation vfpathways inen imnmentaUyoppmphehaamau. VS -1a. Open Space Inventory. Update the Inventory ofPotential Open Consistent The project would be adjacent to existing residential development and would be oonoiumm with the nn|ao element. Consistent with conditions Construction noise would be regulated bythe City noise ordinance massure compliance. Consistent The site is not designated in Appendix 1. However, the upper hillside slope serves as scenic visual open space. This area would be preserved as private open space and no further development would be allowed.Development ieclustered atthe bottom o,the hillside slope, along the exiting private roadway. Exhibit -8 /»vo,nvn/!L^,JvWi,aaw File #: ZC//-kI3I%Y /-0041Y3///-047 EXHIBIT 3 TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020-190ELCERRITO AVE Space Sites. Identify and prioritize open space parcels for future protection. Maximize the use nfavailable resources when assessing City involvement insecuring open space byapplying the following non -prioritized evaluation a. Environmental health and safety issues (specifically geology and hydmlogy).and pmeoha|gavoeisnic hazards. b. Resource Areas and Aesthetics (visual backdrop oredge, unique site features, shorelines/ridgelines, wetlands, wildlife habitat including wildlife movement corridors and habitat for endangered species). c. Importance tothe community aaowhole o,adjoining neighborhoods. d. Merits n[alternative uses. e. Proximity tuother open space areas. f. Recreation potential. g. Accessibility. x. Availability ofoutside financial assistance. i Potential maintenance and management costs and liability exposure for the OS4b.Preservation Opportunities. Through the development review process, preserve open space areas identified onthe Open Space Inventory. Encourage the dedication ofopen space areas that are adjacent mpublic open space. Possibilities also include acquisition nffee title nracquiring easements for preserving open space. When potential open space isnot contiguous toexisting public open space, the preference ieturetain the open space inprivate ownership. When portions of a site are retained as private open space, ensure the preservation and management of that open space through appropriate means, including required maintenance, aodetermined though development review. Work with other public and non-profit agencies tpidentify sources for acquisition and maintenance nfopen space. OS4u.Cluster Development. Aspart ofthe development review process, encourage the clustering nfdevelopment topreserve desired open noawa. OS'3.Open Space Use. Protect and preserve the natural value o,open space and wildlife habitat areas while permitting educational and recreational uses compatible with these resources. Specific use objectives include: a. Open space areas should hemaintained inanatural state. b. Open space areas are acommunity resource for use and enjoyment uythe residents ofSan Rafael. C. Uses ofopen space areas shall bosecondary mopen Space preservation, and limited tothose uses with aminimal impact unthe environment. nS-naManagement nfPrivate Open Space. |ndesignating open space eo part ofedevelopment project urwith the dedication ofland for open space, identify limitations tvuses mthose areas, such anrestrictions onornamental landscaping, structures and fences. OS'4.xccess tnOpen Space. Encourage provision ofaccess tnopen space areas in the design of adjacent development. Secure access paths shown on Exhibit 34 as part ofsubdivision approvals and design access paths toavoid o,minimize neighborhood and user conflicts with sensitive wildlife habitat areas. OS~*^.Access Points. Through the development review process, identify access points and parking areas voueretained and required improvements. CONSERVATION ELEMENT Consistent. See discussion ofOS-1above. Consistent. � This site isnot designated asunopen space access point onExhibit 34. Exhibit -9 /Jnlermunn2Lo/Subt&,si'm File 4: ZC//-00J/TS]/-V041ED/1-047 EXHIBIT 3 TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAELGENERAL PLAN 2D20-190 ELCERRITO AVE CON -11. Protection of Environmental Resources. Protect or enhance environmental Consistent resources, such anmunoinogewavo. The proposed project would be developed on a previously graded and disturbed portion of the site with the shorelines and habitat for threatened and endangered species. undeveloped uphill slope preserved as a permanent conservation area. CON -4. Wetland Setbacks. Maintain aminimum 5V-fmtdevelopment-free setback from wetlands, including, but not limited to, paving or structures. Setbacks of greater than 5Ufeet may be required unlots nftwo o,more acres osdetermined through development review. The City may waive this requirement for minor encroachments if itcan bedemonstrated that the proposed setback adequately protects the functions n[ the wetland tothe maximum extent feasible and resulting values to the satisfaction of the City after review bythe appropriate regulatory agencies. CDm'6.Creek and orainagewavSetbacks. Require development -free sexhacks.oxoeptforopocificammxspuimnaeappmvod per policy CON-7(Public Access mCmexe).from existing creeks and dminwgawoys that will maintain the functions and resulting values of these habitats, Appropriate erosion control and roadway crossings may encroach into the development setback. |othe absence nfvegetation, promote new growth of natural habitat. a. Creek Setback. Maintain uminimum a5 - foot development -free setback from the top o[creek banks for all new development (induding.but not limited to, paving and mmctvnas).except for Miller Creek and its tributaries, where a minimum oo-fbmsetback shall bemaintained. Setbacks upm10ofeet may bo required onlots nrdevelopment projects two u,more acres msize where development review determines a wider setback is needed to maintain functions and resulting habitat values and mareas where high quality riparian habitat exists. The City may waive this requirement for minor encroachments if itcan bn demonstrated that the proposed setback adequately protects the functions nfthe creek mthe maximum extent feasible and resulting values mthe satisfaction of the City after review bythe appropriate regulatory agencies. b. Dmina8pwaySetbacks. Dminegewaysetbacks shall beestablished through individual development review, taking into account existing habitat functions and resulting values. CON -6a. Municipal Code Compliance. Ensure that the San Rafael Municipal Code complies with local, state, and federal regulatory agencies requirements for erosion control. CON -S. Enhancement ofCreeks and DrainaQoways.Explore enhancement of, and support continuous upgrades to, drainageways to serve as wildlife habitat corridors for wildlife movement and mserve osflood control facilities toaccommodate storm drainage. Require creek Enhancement and associated riparian habitat restoration/creation for projects adjacent to creeks to maintain storm flows, reduce erosion and maintenance and improve habitat values, where feasible. oVw-Va.Creek Restoration. Encourage and support efforts uy neighborhood associations, environmental organizations and other interested groups tnfund creek enhancement, restoration and maintenance programs. CVm'nu.Tree Retention. Retain trees along creeks, where possible, for preservation o(riparian habitat and o,inhibit growth n(algae. CON -9. Native and/or Sensitive Habitats. Protect habitats that are sensitive, rare, declining and unique orrepresent ovaluable biological resource. Consistent The project does not impact wetlands. There are no creeks on site. An existing drainage ravine that runs southerly along the new lot line is proposed to be located outside the building envelope, thus within a permanent conservation area. Consistent See Con -4 above Consistent See Con -4 above Consistent See CON -1 above. Wildlife corridors and natural vegetation will be protected in a permanent private open Exhibit J -1V /1nu,nmon26xxvhdi.`isax, File 9: DC}/'0031T3//'0041ED//-047 EXHIBIT 3 TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2Q20-180 ELCERRITO AVE CON -10. Impacts to Sensitive Habitats. Minimize impacts to sensitive natural habitats through careful planning. Require compliance with applicable laws and regulations. c6m-1 1.Wildlife Corridors. Preserve and protect areas that function aswildlife corridors, particularly those areas that provide natural connections permitting wildlife movement between designoted sensitive habitats. CON -12. Preservation of Hillsides. Encourage preservation of hillsides, ridgelines and other open areas that serve as habitat and erosion protection as well as visual backdrops murban areas. CON -13. Threatened and Endangered Species. Preserve and protect threatened and endangered species of plants and animals formally listed consistent with the state and federal endangered species acts including protection «[ their habitat. CON 4. Special Status Species. Preserve and protect special status plants and animals, including candidate species for listing under the state and federal endangered speciesacts, California species ufspecial concern, California Native Plant Society List 10plants, and other species protected under provisions of California Fish and Game Code. CON-1s.Invasive Non -Native Plant Species. Remove and control selected undesirable invasive non-native plant species from City -owned open space and road right of and encourage the removal and control nfthese invasive plant species from non -City owned ecologically -sensitive areas. COwA 5a.Invasive Plant Ordinance. Consider the legality, feasibility and enforceability ofmnInvasive Plant Ordinance addressing the removal of invasive species on private and public properties. As part of the ordinance, evaluate the benefits and impacts ofusing herbicide vninvasive species where there are noother feasible controls. oom-1su.Removal vxInvasive Species vnPublic Property. Institute a program toremove invasive plant species oopublic properties. Consider the use n/volunteers and private organizations massist inthis effort. CON -16. Landscape with Native Plant Species. Encourage landscaping with native and compatible non-native plant species, especially drought -resistant species. CON'1aa.Distribution ufInformation. Distribute Marin Municipal Water District and other organizations' educational materials about native plant landscaping. CON -18. Resource- UicipntBuilding Design. Promote and encourage residences mberesource, energy and water efficient bycreating incentives and removing obstacles tnpromote their use. Cnw'18aEnergy-efficient Homes. Encourage the construction nfhomes and buildings that exceed Title zostandards. Consider adoption ofun ordinance requiring greater energy efficiency inconstruction uflarger »umpo. oON-1oh.Zoning and Building Code Review. Identify barriers to resource efficiency iothe Zoning and Building Codes and evaluate the suitability ovremoving those obstacles. uVw'1oc.Use of Alternative Building Materials. Evaluate the benefits and impacts nfamending the City's building codes and zoning ordinances tnallow the use ofacceptable resource -efficient alternative bui|Uing space/conservation area Consistent See CON -1 above. Consistent See CON -1 Consistent See CON -1 Consistent See CON -1 Consistent See CON -1 Consistent with conditions Adetailed landscape and revegetation plan will be required for the project, which includes replanting with native grasses and plants. Consistent See CON -15 Consistent with conditions The project would besubject mcompliance with the City Green Building Ordinance. Exhibit 3-// Unte,omxv2Lot Sxb&,mam File #: 2C//-0o3/TSD/'0041EJ)/-047 /Yo/J(en`l,J``' Title: General Plan 2020Consistency Table EXHIBIT 3 TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020 -190 EL CERRITO AVE materials and methods. CON -18d. Incentives for Solar and Clean Energy. Seek ways to provide incentives for solar and clean energy systems. CON -18e. LEED Program. Encourage developers to use "Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design" Standards. CON -19. Energy Resources. Support the development of renewable and/or efficient generating resources to reduce the County's reliance on non-renewable energy supplies. CON -19a. Energy Production. Consider means to encourage options, such as photovoltaic cells, for energy production, CON -20. Water Conservation. Encourage water -conserving practices in businesses, homes and institutions and increase the use of recycled water. CON -20a. Water Conserving Landscaping. Make available to property managers, designers and homeowners information about water -conserving landscaping and water -recycling methods and resources. CON -20b. Water Recycling. Support the extension of recycled water distribution infrastructure. Require the use of recycled water where available. AIR AND WATER QUALITY ELEMENT Consistent See CON -18 Consistent with conditions Project landscaping would be reviewed by MMWD to assure compliance. AW -1. State and Federal Standards. Continue to comply and strive to exceed state Consistent with condition and federal standards for air quality for the benefit of the Bay Area. The project would not generate any air quality impacts and would be consistent with the Bay Area Air Quality District requirements. Construction practices will be required to minimize dust and vehicle fumes. Furthermore, the proposed development is within the additional development assumed under the General Plan 2020 and therefore cumulative impacts have been analyzed and found to be acceptable. AW -2. Land Use Compatibility. To ensure excellent air quality, promote land use Consistent compatibility for new development by using buffering techniques such as landscaping, This project is consistent with the single-family residential neighborhood. setbacks and screening in areas where different land uses abut one another. AW -7. Local, State and Federal Standards. Continue to comply with local, state and federal standards for water quality. 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 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. AW -9. Erosion and Sediment Control. Establish development guidelines to protect areas that are particularly susceptible to erosion and sediment loss. Consistent on& stent with conditions- 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 proposed drainage plan is designed to be consistent with the stormwater pollution standards by treating stormwater runoff on-site in landscape areas or through an on-site filtration area before it enters into the storm drain system. Consistent See AW -7 above. Furthermore, as a standard building permit condition of approval, the proposed project would implement a storm water pollution and prevention plan (SWPPP) and Best Management Practices to minimize impacts on water quality and non -point source pollution discharge into the storm water system. Consistent with conditions See AW -8 above. An erosion control plan would be required as part of the building permit plans. Exhibit 3 -12 Unterniann 2 Lot Subdivision File 9: ZCl 1-003ITSI 1-0041ED] 1-047 190 E'l Cerrito Ave Title: General Plan 2020 Consistency Table EXHIBIT 3 TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2020 —190 EL CERRITO AVE SUSTAINABILITY ELEMENT SU -5. Reduce Use of Non Renewable Resources. Reduce dependency of non renewable resources SU -5a. Green Building Regulations. Require new construction and remodel project to comply with adopted green building regulations. SU -5b. Energy Efficiency Programs. Develop and implement energy efficiency and conservation programs to achieve a 20% reduction in energy use by 2020, including PACE financing, stretch building codes, energy audit and upgrades upon resale, education and outreach, SU -5c. 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, SU -5d. Reflective Surfaces. Encourage the use of high albedo (reflectivity materials for future outdoor surfaces such as parting lots, roadways, roofs and sidewalks. Consistent The project would be required to comply with the current green building ordinance regulations, which would require a minimum number of points on the Build it Green rating scale, depending on the size of the new home and 15% more energy efficiently than that required by standard building codes. In addition, the project landscaping would be required to comply with the water efficient landscape ordinance requirement of MMWD. SU -8. Social Diversity and Equity. Enhance social equity among all segments of the Consistent community. The project and zoning includes the provision to allow a second dwelling unit on site. Although second dwelling units are not rent restricted units, they are affordable by design and provide a significant amount of affordable SU -8a. Affordable Housing. Continue to expand the supply of affordable housing opportunities with in the City of San Rafael as a whole. housing which reduces commute times and congestion. Exhibit 3 -13 Unterm ann 2 Lot Subdivision File #: 701-0031T.S11-0041ED11-047 190 El Cee-ito Ave Title: General Plan 2020 Consistencv Table TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAELZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 14)-19OELCERRITO AVE CHAPTER 1 -TITLE, COMPONENTS AND PURPOSE i4�.030-Purposes. The San Rafael Zoning Ordinance isadopted to promote and protect the public health, safety, peace, comfort and general welfare. The zoning ordinance is also intended to promote the following more specific purposes: A. To implement and promote the goals and policies of the San Rafael general plan, so as to guide and manage future development inthe city inaccordance with such plan; B. Tofoster harmonious and workable relationships among land uxoo� C. To reduce or remove negative impacts caused by inappropriate location, use or design of buildings and improvements; D. Toprotect, strengthen and diversify the economic base mfthe city; E. To promote viable commercial and industrial enterprises that provide diverse employment opportunities for city residents; F. To ensure the adequate provision of light, air, space, fire safety and privacy between buildings; G. To provide adequate, safe and effective off-street parking and loading facilities; H To promote a safe, effective traffic circulation system, and maintain acceptable local circulation system operating conditions; | To promote design quality in all development and to preserve and enhance the city's existing historic, architectural, and cultural resources; J To preserve and enhance natural resources and key visual features in the community, including the bay shoreline, canal, wetlands, and hillsides; K� Toprotect and conserve the city's existing housing stock; L Topromote housing development tomeet housing needs, including affordable housing and special housing needs; MTo coordinate the service demands of new development with the capacities of existing streets, utilities and public services; N. To provide for effective citizen participation in decision-making. (Ord. 1625 § 1 (part), 1992). CHAPTER 7- PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS 14.07.01USpecific purposes. The specific purposes ofthe planned development (PC) district are to: A. Promote and encourage cluster development on large sites to avoid sensitive areas of property; B. Encourage innovative design on large sites by allowing flexibility in property development standards; C. Encourage the establishment ofopen areas inland development; D. Encourage the assembly of properties that might otherwise be developed in unrelated increments to the detriment ofsurrounding neighborhoods; E Establish a procedure for the development of large lots of land in order to reduce or eliminate the rigidity, delays and conflicts that otherwise would result from application of zoning standards and procedures designed primarily for small lots; FAccommodate various types of large-scale, complex, mixed-use, phased developments; G. Enable affected governmental bodies to receive information and provide an integrated response to both the immediate and |ong'nanqeimpacts ofsuch proposed developments. Complies The project would result inahannoniou residential development pattern that iacompatible with the adjacent single family residential properties. Complies The development implements the General Plan with an appropriate density of single-family residential development. <—Yhibit:f-\ /1m,mm/w2 Lw,';ubJnim^w File #: ZY- /f03,7V/-004,1EJ] /-047 /voBC'nxoJ`, Title: Zoning Ordinance r"nsmtemcYTable EXHIBIT TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAELZON|NG ORDINANCE (TITLE i4)-19QELCERRITO AVE 14.O7.020Land use regulations. A. No use other than an existing use or a temporary use approved pursuant to section D, below, shall be permitted inaPDdistrict except inaccord with avalid development plan. Any permitted orconditional use authorized by this title may be included in an approved development plan, consistent with the general plan land use designation(s) and intensities for land within the PD district. The PD zoning approval shall establish the range of allowable land uses for the development. B. A master use permit or individual use permits may be required to establish specific uses on the property consistent with general plan land uses and parking standards. A master use permit shall be required for nonresidential, phased and/or multi -tenant development C A development plan is not required for existing school sites located in the PD district. A use permit shall be required for any nonpublic school uses of the site, or for reuse of any existing school facilities, per Section 14.09.020, land use regulations (P/QP). A development plan shall be required when such property redevelops D� Temporary uses may be permitted within a PD district, with or without an approved or valid development plan. The performance standards and provisions of Section 14.17.130 of this Title shall apply to temporary uses, and shall be administered through a use permit (zoning administrator 14.07.03OProperty development regulations. A, Minimum Area. The minimum net area of a PD district shall be 2.5 acres, provided that a PD district may be subdivided in accord with a valid PD plan; exceptions to this provision are lots over 0.5 acres in size where developed to provide affordable housing and hillside residential lots over one acre in size where unusual site characteristics exist. B. Residential Unit Density. The total number of dwelling units in a PD plan shall not exceed the maximum number permitted by the general plan density for the total site area. Density bonuses for senior housing development and affordable housing development may be considered consistent with general plan policies and state law. C. Nonresidential Intensity. Nonresidential development shall not exceed floor area ratios, as specified in the general plan, except in the downtown where a one-time ten percent (10%) bonus may apply,for business expansion. D. Building Height Limits. Building heights shall be consistent with height standards contained in the general plan. E. Other Development Regulations. Other development regulations shall be as prescribed by the development plan. 14.07.040. Authority The planning commission shall recommend approval, conditional approval or denial of applications to reclassify property to the PD district and/or applications for development plans to the city council. The city council shall have the authority to approve, conditionally approve or deny rezonings and/or development plan applications Complies The applicant has submitted adraft development plan and draft PD District regulations. The current site iudesignated as PD, therefore the proposal 10subdivide the site and add anew lot requires the PDRezoning and the review and approval cda development plan. Complies The minimum site area for each ofthe two lots would begreater than 3acres each, thus exceeding the minimum size nf1acre that is required for hillside lots. The residential density iswithin the maximum number permitted in the General Plan for the site, given that the General Plan allows O.1—U.5units/gross acre for site designated aoHillside Residential Resource. This site ix7.15acres and thus allows between 0.75and 3.575units. Although the General Plan maximum density would allow upto3.575units ona7.15site, the subdivision ordinance and hillside subdivision standards establish amaximum #ofunits for this size ofproperty at2lots based onthe slope ofthe site. The draft PDregulation provide development standards for building stepbanko.setbacks, natural state, gross building square footage. Building envelope, parking, landscaping, tree removal and maximum height for both the new lot and the existing lot. These standards are consistent with the standards required for development of any property in a hillside area. Complies The Planning Commission will boreviewing the proposed project and the proposed PDrezoning and providing their recommendation 10the City Council for final action. Exhibit: 4 -2 /ntenvom2Cmxnhdi,is^x/ File H: Z[//-003/%7 /'0V412D//-047 EXHIBIT 4 TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAEL ZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 14) —190 EL CERRITO AVE 14.07.0g0 -Findings, A recommendation by the planning commission to the city council or a decision by the city council to reclassify property 0othe PDdistrict and/or toapproveedevelopmon\p|ansheUbebaoedonthofo|lowing set ofrequired findings: A. The development plan is consistent with the general plan, adopted neighborhood plans and other applicable city plans orpolicies; B. Any residential development shall constitute a residential environment of sustained desirability and stability in harmony with the character of the surrounding neighborhood, and where applicable, adequate open space shall beprovided; C. Any nonresidential uses shall be appropriate in area, location and overall planning for the purpose intended, and the design and development standards shall create a nonresidential environment of sustained desirability and stability, and where applicable, adequate open space shall be provided; D. The applicant demonstrates that public facilities are provided to serve the anticipated population; E The development is improved by deviations from typical zoning ordinance property development and parking standards; and F. The auto, bicycle and pedestrian traffic system is adequately designed for circulation needs and public safety. Emergency vehicle access is provided to serve the proposed development. 14.V7.10O-Contents ofPDzoning approvals. A� PDzoning approvals shall include atext summary ofthe approved development plan, including the range of allowable land uses, residential density, number and type(s) of residential units, commercial/industrial intensity, building square footage devoted to each type of nonresidential land use, site development standards including setbacks, building envelopes, lot coverage and height limits, parking, open space areas, outdoor amenities and any other critical components of development approval. B. A master use permit or individual use permit(s) may be required as per Section 14.07.020 to establish specific use approvals and to evaluate compliance with trip allocations and parking standards. ' CHAPTER 12- HILLSIDE OVERLAY DISTRICT 14.12.010 Specificpurposee In addition to the general purposes listed in Section 14.01.030, the purposes of the hillside development overlay district include the following: A. To protect public health and safety by minimizing hazards, including seismic and landslide risks, soil erosion and fire danger associated with development on steep and/or unstable slopes; B Twencourage preservation o/natural hillside features; C Toensure adequate emergency access byproviding on-site parking; D To implement the residential site design policies of the general plan and the Hillside Residential Design Guidelines Manual, Complies Based on the analysis of the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance, the Hillside Guidelines and the environmental review, staff recommends that the Rezoning io appropriate and the required findings can bomade based onthe The proposed development plan isconsistent with the General Plan and the applicable policies and density established bythe plan, the proposed new residential lot would beincharacter and harmony with the surrounding single family structures and neighborhood. The require public facilities, such axwater, sewer, roads and other public improvements are adequate to accommodate anew single family residential lot and new single family home The vehicular and pedestrian traffic system ioadequately designed 0naccommodate the development ofanew single family lot inthe hillside area and emergency service providers have reviewed the project and determined that they can provide access the development incase ofemergency Complies The proposed PD regulations contain the required development and land use standards. Complies with conditions The subdivision design respects the contours and hillside setting 10the maximum extent feasible. The proposed development would belocated atthe lower portion ofthe site, inapreviously graded area. Conceptual plans have been presented that demonstrate that the new lot isfeasible for development with a structure that meets the hillside standards. Aseparate Design Review application and review for the specific design ofthe proposed residence iorequired. Exhibit: 4 -3 /4m,nm"n2 LmSubdi,isuv/ File 4: i17/-00J3Y/-0041%D//-047 EXHIBIT TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAELZ0N|NG ORDINANCE (TITLE 1/)—f90 ELCERRHO AVE 14.12.020 Criteria for establishment of hillside development overlay district. A. These regulations shall apply to all lots with an average slope greater than twenty-five percent (25%) or in the hillside resource residential orhillside residential general plan land use districts. The hillside development overlay district on the zoning map is placed on those lots which are in the hillside resource residential orhillside residential general plan land use districts. B� Lots with an average slope greater than twenty-five percent (25%) not shown in the hillside development overlay district are presumed to exist in the city and are protected under all of the terms and provisions of this chapter. Development on such lots requires compliance with the requirements of the hillside development overlay district, except that such lots need not be rezoned to the hillside development overlay district. 14.12.O3OProperty development standards (-H}. Development standards shall be those of the underlying zoning district with which a hillside development overlay district is combined, provided that the following shall be in addition and shall govern where conflicts arise, except for subsection G.Lot Standards, where the lot size standard ofthe underlying zoning district applies when more restrictive than the subdivision ordinance. A. Building Stepback. A building stepback is established to limit the height of structures to avoid excessive building bulk, On the downhill slope walls and on walls facing front and side property lines, a twenty- foot(2O')height|imitmeasuvedhnmexio1inggnudeohaUbeobuomodwithinaUareauwi1hinfiftennfeot (15') ofthe maximum building envelope limit. Tnallow for design flexibility, unencroachment into the street front, street side and interior side stepback is permitted along twenty-five percent (25%) of the building length. B, Setbacks. Structures may encroach into a required yard or setback for a distance of not more than one- half of the required yard or setback, subject tuapproval bythe hearing body ofanenvironmental and design review permit, with the recommendation of the design review board that the decrease minimizes the impact of hillside development and grading. If such a reduction is granted, a compensating increase in setback is required in the opposing setback, i.e., a five-foot (5) reduction in a front yard setback would increase the rear yard setback byfive feet (5'). C. Natural State. A minimum area of twenty-five percent (25%) of the lot area plus the percentage figure of average slope, not to exceed a maximum of eighty-five percent (85%), must remain in its natural state. This standard may be waived or reduced for lots zoned PD (planned district) or developed with clustered development with the recommendation of the design review board, subject to approval by the hearing body. Q Gross Building Square Footage. The maximum permitted gross building square footage of all structures (including garages and accessory structures over one hundred twenty (120) square feet) is limited to two thousand five hundred (2,500) square feet plus ten percent (10%) of the lot area with the maximum gross square footage set otsix thousand five hundred (0.5O0)square feet. E. Ridgeline Development. Development of new structures within one hundred (100) vertical feet of a visually significant ridgeline, as shown on the community design map of the general plan, is prohibited unless this restriction precludes all reasonable economic use of the property. F� Parking Requirements, On streets less than twenty-six feet (26') wide, a minimum of two (2) additional on-site parking spaces shall be provided (not on the driveway apron). These spaces should be conveniently placed relative to the dwelling unit which they predominately serve. This requirement may be waived or reduced by the hearing body when the size or shape of the lot or the need for excessive grading urtree removal makes the requirement infeasible. G. Lot Standards. Minimum lot sizes and widths for lots created after November 21,1991 are subject to the Generally consistent The—Hotandands would remain applicable to both the existing and new lots. Complies with conditions The site has been evaluated for consistency with Title 1S.and final design review ofproposed residential development will be required hoassure compliance with these standards. The conceptual plan demonstrates ohouse Gan bebuilt in compliance with these standards. The lot sizes of3Dacres for the new lot and 3.24for the existing single family home are consistent with the slope density table, which establishes a minimum lot size of2acres for new lots. The proposed PDstandards also include all the applicable hillside standards contained inthis section oodevelopment standards for any new development on the site. Exhibit: 44 (J,/u`nu"//2 Lot Subdivision File i�: ZC//-00317S//-0041lI}U'047 EXHIBIT TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAELZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 14)-190ELCERRITO AVE slope tables established under Chapter 15.34ofthe subdivision ordinance. H. Design Review Requirement. An environmental and design review permit may be required, consistent with the requirements of Chapter 14.25, Environmental and Design Review Permits. All applications shall be evaluated for conformity with the Hillside Residential Design Guidelines Manual. 14.12.040 Exceptions toproperty development standards. Exceptions to the property development standards may be approved by the city council, upon the recommendation of the design review board and the planning commission, when the applicant has demonstrated that alternative design concepts carry out the objectives ofthis chapter and are consistent with the general plan based onthe following criteria: A. The project design alternative meets the stated objectives of the hillside design guidelines to preserve the inherent characteristics of hillside sites, display sensitivity to the natural hillside setting and compatibility with nearby hillside neighborhoods, and maintain a strong relationship to the natural setting; and B. Alternative design solutions which minimize grading, retain more of the project site in its natural state, minimize visual impacts, protect significant trees, or protect natural resources result in a demonstrably superior project with greater sensitivity to the natural setting and compatibility with and sensitivity tonearby structures. CHAPTER 16- SITE AND USE REGULATIONS 14.10000Affordable housing requirement. X Purpose. The purpose of this section is to enhance the public welfare and ensure that further residential and nonresidential development projects within the city contribute to the attainment of affordable housing goals and requirements by promoting and increasing, through actual construction and/or alternative equivalent actions as provided for in this section, the development of rental and ownership housing units for very low, low and moderate income households. B. General Requirements --Residential Development Projects. Any new residential development project with dwelling units intended or designed for permanent occupancy shall be developed to provide affordable housing units to very low, low and moderate income households in perpetuity unless, in its sole discretion and upon a finding of need pursuant to subsection E of this section, the city council reduces the time frame tonot less than forty (40years. 1. Exemptions. This provision shall be imposed on all residential development projects except that the following shall beexempt from the provisions nfthis section: 2. AObrdableHousingUnha—PementageRmquimd.Reaidonda development projects shall provide affordable housing units asfollows: Project Size Percentage ofAffordable Housing Units 2-1OHousing Units* 1096. .�. ` CHAPTER 18- PARKING STANDARDS A. 14L18.040 Use Classification Off -Street ParkiM Reauired Complies NoHillside exceptions have been requested. Complies Not applicable to addition of 1 single-family dwelling unit, Complies The conceptual plans demonstrate 2 covered and 2 uncovered F_x6ibit:!-5 /nx,`xnnv2 Lot Subdivision file #: 7C//-003/73//-0041ED//-047 /vVF1Cerrito J`e Title: Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table 1*11:N411111IN TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAEL ZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE f4)-190 ELCERRITO AVE Single-family residential 2covered spaces per unit. spaces can boaccommodated onthe site. Single-family residential, hillside On streets less than 20feet wide, aminimum oftwo additional on- site parking spaces shall be provided (not on the driveway apron) per unit. These spaces should be conveniently placed relative to the dwelling unit which they serve. This requirement may be waived or reduced by the hearing body when the size or shape of the lot or the need for excessive grading or tree removal make the requirement infeasible. CHAPTER 25- ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN REVIEW PERMITS . � 14.25D10Specific 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 environmental 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 to: 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; C� Maintain and improve the quality of, and relationship between, development and the surrounding area to contribute tothe attractiveness ofthe 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 techniques; F, Preserve and enhance views from other buildings and public property; G. Ensure the right to make residential additions and modifications which minimize the impact on adjacent residences and which are designed to be compatible with the existing residence and neighborhood, \ 14.25.O5UReview criteria. A. Consistency with General Plan Design Policies. To ensure that each proposed improvement shall accomplish the purposes of Section 14.25.010, Specific purposes, environmental and design review shall beguided bygeneral plan design policies, and the following criteria. B. Consistency with Specific Plans. In addition to the criteria listed below, development will also be evaluated for consistency with applicable neighborhood and area design plans. Adopted plans which include design guidelines include: Hillside Residential Design Guidelines Manual, Shoreline Park master plan, East San Rafael neighborhood plan, Peacock Gap neighborhood plan, and Sun Valley/Fairhills neighborhood plan. In addition, the following design guidelines have been adopted by resolution and apply to specific areas in San Rafael: the downtown design guidelines, and the Monieci1o/HoppyVaUmy residential design guidelines. C. Design Criteria. Review shall be guided by the following criteria to assure that, with regard to buildings, structures and physical improvements, each proposed development shall carry out the purposes of this chapter, the general plan policies and any design plans. Any or all of the following criteria may, upon recommendation of the design review board, be waived by the planning commission when the applicant has demonstrated that alternative design concepts carry out the objectives of this chapter and where such development imconsistent with the general plan. Hillside nouidonUa| design criteria may bewaived bythe city council with the following findings: 1 The project design alternative meets the stated objectives of the guidelines to preserve the Complies |naddition 10the hillside residence, the design ofthe hillside subdivision, including the building envelope, sting ofthe envelope and design ofconceptual improvements requires Design Review. Review ofthe home iuconceptual innature ot this time, hodemonstrate the proposed parcel iobuildable. The lot configuration, building area, design ofdriveway, walls and drainage improvements, and conceptual home design appear ho comply with the purposes. Complies with conditions The project was reviewed and recommended favorably bythe Design Review Board onSeptember 2D.2011.with a recommendation made toidentify the types oftypical improvements that may beallowed outside the building envelope inthe front ofthe structure. Final design details for retaining walls and related subdivision grading and drainage improvements would borequired tobesubmitted with final improvement plans, to assure the walls, grading and re - vegetation details adhere to the hillside design guidelines manual. Separate final design review for anew residence would bomquimd.toaonuvaoomp|ianoowiththe—Hovedayund design guidelines. The subdivision will beanalyzed instaff ureport 0oassess compliance with the Title 15hillside subdivision regulations and Hillside Guidelines subdivision criteria. Flexibility indesign of streets iupermissible for hillside subdivisions. The project has not requested any deviations from hillside standards. |ngeneral, Exhibit: 4 -6 /6"nxum2 Lot Subdivision File 4: ZC//-00]/7S//'V041ED//-047 /vo/}Cerrito ,kr Tide: Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAELZON|NG ORDINANCE (TITLE 14)-190ELCERRITO AVE inherent characteristics of hillside sites, display sensitivity to the natural hillside setting and compatibility with nearby hillside neighborhoods, and maintain a strong relationship to the natural setting; and 2. Alternative design solutions which minimize grading, retain more of the project site in its natural state, minimize visual impacts, protect significant trees, orprotect natural resources result ina demonstrably superior project with greater sensitivity to the natural setting and compatibility with and sensitivity ho nearby structures. D Competent Design. The development plans shall be designed by, and bear the signature of a person who, under the building code, has been designated as legally competent to submit such development proposal. Plans for adevelopment subject toamajor environmental and design review permit before the design review board shall be prepared by, and bear the signature of, an architect and/or landscape architect licensed bythe state ofCalifornia Department ofConsumer Affairs. E. Site Design. There should be a harmonious relationship between structures within the development and between the structures and the site. Proposed structures and site development should be related accordant to existing development in the vicinity. There must be a consistent organization of materials and abalanced relationship ofmajor elements. 1. Views. Major views of the San Pablo Bay, wetlands, bay frontage, the Canal, Mt. Tama|pa\oand the hills should be preserved and enhanced from public streets and public vantage points. In addition, respect views ofSt. Ruphae|'oChurch up^A^Street. 2. Site Features and Constraints. Respect site features and recognize site constraints by minimizing grading, erosion and removal of natural vegetation. Sensitive areas such as highly visible hillsides, steep, unstable or hazardous slopes, creeks and drainageways, and wildlife habitat should be preserved and respected. 3. Access, Circulation and Parking. The development should provide good vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian circulation and access, on-site and in relation to the surrounding area, including public streets, waterways, shorelines and open space areas. Safe and convenient parking areas should be designed to provide easy access to building entrances. Parking facilities should detract as little as possible from the design of proposed or neighboring structures. Entrances to parking structures should be well-defined and should include materials compatible with those of the parking garage. Traffic capacity ofadjoining streets must boconsidered. 4. Energy -Efficient Design. The site design shall show that due regard has been given to orientation ofstructures tostreets and climatic considerations. 5. Drainage. Special attention shall be given to proper site surface drainage and an adequate drainage system. (Nota:The details ofdrainage systems shall bosubject haapproval /f the director ofthe department ofpublic works.) 8. Utility Service. Utility connections shall be installed underground. Proposed method of sanitary sewage disposal for all buildings shall be indicated. Refuse collection areas shall be screened and located in areas convenient both to users and to persons who make collections. There shall be adequate ingress and egress to all utilities. (Note: Recycling facilities must meet Standard of Resolution 93-57.) F. Architecture, The project architecture should be harmoniously integrated in relation to the architecture in the vicinity in terms of colors and materials, scale and building design. The design should be sensitive to and compatible with historic and architecturally significant buildings in the vicinity, and should enhance important community gateways, view corridors and waterways as identified in the general plan. 1. Design Elements and Approaches. Desiqn elements and approaches which are encouraqed the project appears tocomply with the hillside and design review requirements and criteria. Exhibit: 4 -7 (nternm/m2 L.^abdi,is/,m /J,�., 70/-003I7J//-004/ED//-047 /901"1'e,`m,or Ti/le: Zoning Ordinance Cwmmtencrzoa/v EXHIBIT TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAELZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 14)-190 ELCERR[TO AVE include: u.Creation ofinterest inthe building elevation; b. Pedestrian -oriented design inappropriate locations; o. Energy-efficient design; d.Provision ofosense nfentry; e.Variation inbuilding placement and height; [ Dwelling units accessible |othe mobi|ity+impaimd; g. Equal attention 0odesign ofall facades insensitive locations; h Bedrooms and decks oriented away from high noise sources; i� Common usable areas should offer residents a convenient and attractive place to exercise, relax and meet one another; j. Private yard areas should be oriented away from high noise sources and take advantage of view opportunities and solar orientation. 2� Materials and Colors. Materials and colors should be consistent with the context of the surrounding area. To minimize contrast of the structure with its background as viewed from the surrounding neighborhood, color selection shall coordinate with the predominant colors and values of the surrounding landscape and architecture. High-quality building materials are required. in hillside areas, as identified in Section 14.12.020 of this title, natural materials and colors in the earth tone and woodnote range are generally preferred. Other colors and materials may be used which are appropriate to the architectural style, harmonious with the site and/or compatible with the character ofthe surrounding environment. m. Earthtone/woodtone colors are considered to be various natural shades of reddish -brown, brown. grey, tan, ocher, umbar, go|d, oend, blue and green. b. Natural materials include adobe, slump block, bhok, stono, stucco, wood shakes, shingles and aidin0, and tile roofs. o. Concrete surfaces shall be colored, textured, sculptured and/or patterned to serve a design a»well aoustructural function. d. Metal buildings, roofs, or finishes that develop an attractive oxidized finish (such as copper or weathering steel) may be used. Unpainted metal, galvanized metal or metal subject torusting isdiscouraged. e Glare -reducing and color -harmonizing finishes may be required on glass surfaces when they constitute fifty percent (50%) or more of a wall or building face, or when they permit a view ofpipes, utilities and other service units. [ Reflective glass, such as mirror or glazed, is discouraged. Such glass may be prohibited where it has an adverse impact, such as glare on pedestrian or automotive traffic or on adjacent structures. g. Roof materials shall minimize reflectivity. 3. Walls, Fences, and Screening. Walls, fences and screening shall baused toscreen parking and loading areas, refuse collection areas and mechanical equipment from view. Screening of mechanical equipment shall bedesigned aaanintegrated architectural component ofthe building and the landscape. Utility meters and transformers shall be incorporated into the overall project design. 4. Exterior Lighting. Light sources should provide safety for the building occupants, but not create a glare or hazard on adjoining streets or be annoying to adjacent properties or residential areas. 14.25.090 Findings. Complies Exhibit: 4 -8 //nonmon^2Lot Subdivision File #: ZC//-003,,TY//-00411D//-047 EXHIBIT TABLE ANALYZING PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SAN RAFAELZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 14)—i9OELCERRITO AVE The planning director, zoning administrator ovplanning commission may approve anapplication for an environmental and design review permit. The following findings must be made by the hearing body: A. That the project design is in accord with the general plan, the objectives of the zoning ordinance and the purposes ofthis chapter; B. That the project design is consistent with all applicable site, architecture and landscaping design criteria and guidelines for the district inwhich the site iolocated; C. That the project design minimizes adverse environmental impacts; and D. That the project design will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, nor materially injurious to properties orimprovements inthe vicinity. CHAPTER:27 AM 14.27.020. Authority & The Planning Commission shall recommend to the City Council approval, approval with modifications, or denial of the requested amendment to the zoning map or zoning regulations. After the hearing, the planning commission shall render its decision to the City Council in the form of written recommendation in a report which shall include the reasons for the recommendation, and the relationship of the proposed ordinance or amendment to applicable general and specific plans. O� If the matter under consideration is to rezone property, and the planning commission has recommended against the adoption of such amendment, the city council shall not be required to take any further action thereon unless appealed. Findings for approval have been recommended hnadraft PC Complies Staff has prepared areport and draft resolution for the PCho consider adopting with arecommendation hnthe City Council that the PID rezoning be approved. 1�27.050.Public Notice and Hearing Complies The planning commission shall hold a public hearing on any proposed rezoning or amendment to the zoning Anotice ofhearing was mailed iosurrounding property owners ordinance. Notice ofpublic hearing shall bogiven consistent with Chapter 14.2S.Public Notice and residents within 3OO-feet.posted on-site and published in the newspaper more than the minimum required 2Odays prior 0o the meeting, byMarch 22.2O12. 14.27.060. Findings The City Council may approve anamendment to the zoning map cvzoning regulations if the following findings can bemade: A. The proposed amendment isconsistent inprinciple with the General Plan. B. The public health, safety and general welfare are served by the adoption of the proposed amendment Complies A draft PC resolution has been prepared. Exhibit: 4 -9 [4xo,mmn2 LmSub6,isav, File 9: 2I]/-Dll'TS//-V041ED//-04r WKWE-W CSW/Stuber-Stroeh Engineering Group, Inc. Rev.: June 16, 2011 Date: May 20, 2011 File: 1.835.00 Mr. Raffi Boloyan, Principal Planner City of San Rafael 1400 Fifth Avenue San Rafael, CA 94901 45 Leveroni Court 415.881 850 Novato Novato, CA 94949 Fax 415.883.9835 Petaluma 1M,vvrcswst2.com Sacramento Engineers I Land Planners I Surveyors I Landscape Architects RE: UNTERMANN RESIDENCE 190 EL CERRITO AVENUE, SAN RAFAEL Dear Mr. Boloyan: JUN 2 The Lands of Tom and Merrie Untermann (Assessor's Parcel Number 011-121-10) is a 6.24 Acre parcel located in the City of San Rafael, Marin County, California. It is currently zoned as Planned Development, Hillside (PD -H), and contains a single residential unit. The property is serviced by the Marin Municipal Water District (MM)QVD), the San Rafael Sanitation District (SRSD), and Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E). The site is covered with an abundance of trees, and contains steeply -sloped areas as well as two areas of land suitable for house sites. Although no development is being proposed at this time, the Unternaanns desire to subdivide the lot into two separate parcels. A slope analysis was done of the existing site, comparing existing slope densities to those outlined for development in the City of San Rafael code. Based on this analysis, it was determined that the parcel contains enough area to be divided into two parcels. The existing residence and improvements would be contained within Parcel Two, a proposed Parcel of approximately 3.24 Acres. Proposed Parcel One would contain a gross area of approximately 3.00 Acres. A building envelope for the proposed parcel has been shown within which all improvements will be confined with the exception of private paths to allow maintenance and passive enjoyment of the property. Since the land di:visionmeets all of the City of San Rafael's ordinances for lot size, no improvements, public areas, tree removal, -restrictions, CC and Rs, or any new streets are proposed or necessary. AD current improvements, landscaping, trees, roads, drainage, etc. will remain. In the future house construction on the vacant parcel will follow the required design review application process as a part of a requested building permit. Please find enclosed with this Information Statement a completed Subdivision Application the following items: 2. Completed Application Form b. Fifteen (15) copies of a Tentative Map c. Statement of Intent (this letter) File L,-: ZC I 1-00311TS I 1-004!ED 11-047 d. Recently prepared Tide Information Title: Applicant Letter. 6,116/11 Exhibit: 5A-1 Mr. Raffi Boloyan, Principal Planner City of San Rafael June 16, 2011 Page 2 e. Three (3) copies of a geotechnical investigation f. A check as deposit for the fees associated with the project review g. Planned Development — Hillside Overlay language and Average Slope and Area of Natural State calculations h. Slope Analysis calculations We hope that youwillfind our application is complete, and look forward to hearing from. you. Sincerely, CSW/STUBER-STROEH ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. Tracy W. Park P.L.S. #8172 TWP:sef Enclosures File A': ZC11-003/TS 11-00-1!ED11-017 Title: AmAcant Letter. 6!16111 o;r't1ti1�\1't1�350i�.'.Gti-CG-16153:00 Fi=r :ng Ltneoc, Exhibit: 5A-2 Calculation ofY\verugeS|ope': S= ` OIX}229/|)/U ^ ' A Where: S is the average percent of slope } is the countour interval Listhe summation oflength ofthe contour lines Aisthe area inacres ofthe proposed Parcel S= '' - �0' D29�'U1�311 3ac. Calculation of'Area ofNatural State': Area ofNatural State iobeaminimum of25%ofthe lot area plus the percentage figure of average slope. A minimum of 66% of proposed 3.00 +/- Acre Parcel to remain in Natural State OR A minimum of 1.98 +/- Acres of proposed Parcel to remain in Natural State Proposed Parcel Size: 3Acres Proposed Building Envelope: 1Acre Proposed Area of Natural State: 2 Acres File T`:3CD-00],/TSl}-0048EDll-047 Title: MiDlicant Letter. 6/lQll File #: ZC 11-003/TS I 1-004,`ED 11-047 Title: Arnlicant Letter. 6,116/11 Exhibit: 5B-2 0 U) :L 0 ro rNj U) T -q C) 00 0 0 M I- C) U) liaNNNh >, 'E ra :3 LL uiLn W m Ln N UI) Gig m >1 00 m Z 4- :�2 :� 66 LLJ U) c 0u V) < U) Lu 0 ce 0 fa Z m m Ln 0 I I Z C. a) n 0 N V --i U) 4-J -- n � m N m m c Eru 0 ro a) E ce < ujLU 0 0 0 0 0 M d- t- Ln Nt to 4-- Ln T -i a) t- m 4- 0 0) 4-j 06 0� a; M CO 0 I U) Q) -0 ci u 0> Z3 L- U) — CL u Ln C: 0 fu ra Q) 0)- c:, a) Q) uj 0 c) C) c) m 4 + < 0 (D — 0- ra -j 0 1 0 CD C) C) 0 o 4 M c) -i N m d' � Ln F - File #: ZC 11-003/TS I 1-004,`ED 11-047 Title: Arnlicant Letter. 6,116/11 Exhibit: 5B-2 ~~ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING — CITY COUNCIL You are invited to attend the City Council hearing on the following proposed project: PROJECT1806]Cerrito Ave (VntermannSubdivision) — Request for Rezoning, Tentative Map and Environmental & Design Review Permit m allow; 1) the subdivision of the i le 6,24 -acre hillside parcel into two lots, with the existing single family home at 190 El Cerrito remaining on a 3.24 -acre parcel and a new single family home proposed on a new 3,0 -acre parcel; 2) Rezoning of the site from a Planned Development to a revised Planned Development to reflect the proposed project; and 3) conceptual design review for compliance with the hillside guidelines for design and siting of the proposed new single family residence; APN: 011-121 -10; Planned Development — Hillside Overlay (PD -H) District; Toni and Merrie Untermann, owners; Al Cornwell/CSW Stuber-Stroeh, applicant; File No(s).: TS1 1-004, ZC1 1-003 and ED1 1-047 As required by state law, the project's potential environmental impacts have been assessed, Planning staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project which meets the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A 20 -day public review and comment period on the adequacy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration was initiated Wednesday, March 22, 2012 and concluded on April 10, 2012, Public cornments on the Mitigated Negative Declaratior were also received at the Planning Commission hearing on Tuesday, April 10, 2012 MEETING DATE/TIME/LOCATION: Monday, June 4. 2012' 8:00 p.m.City Council Chambers, 1408 Fifth Ave adDSt, San Rafae|, CA FOR MORE INFORMATION: Con!odRaffii Boloyan, Project Planner at (415) 485-3095 or raffi.boloyan@cityofsanrafael.org. You can also come to the Planning Division office, located in City Hall, 1400 Fifth Avenue, to look at the file for the proposed project. The office is open from 0:3Oe.m.io5:OOp.m.onMonday and Thursday and 8:3Ua.m. to12:45p.m.onTuesday, Wednesday and Friday. You can also view the staff report after 5:00 p.m. on the Friday before the meeting at httr)://www.citvofsanrafael.orolmeetinas WHAT WILL HAPPEN: You can comment on the project. The City Council will consider all public testimony and decide whether to adopt the mitigated negative declaration and approve ordeny the application. |FYOU CANNOT ATTEND: You can send a letter to the Community Development Department, Planning Division, City of San Rafael, P. 0, Box 1515O0.San Rafael, CA84O15-150O.You can also hand deliver i1prior tothe meeting. mthe above time and place, all letters received will uonoted and all interested parties will be heard. If you challenge in court the matter described above, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered at, or prior to, the above referenced public hearing (Government Code Section 65009 (b) (2)) Judicial review of an administrative decision of the City Council must be filed with the Court not later than the 90t" day following the date of the Council's decision. (Code mCivil Procedure Section 1mw.6) Sign Language and interpretation and assistive listening devices may m,requested oycalling (4/5)*85-30ms(mice)v,(4/5)/us-31yn(roD)at least ,zhours uadvance, Copies o/ cocmnenmare available maccessible formats upon request Public transportation mCity Hall mavailable through Golden Gate Transit, Line o2n'ox.Para-transit mavailable axcalling wxisoesmnWheels at (4/5)*54'0964. O M M M d d O O d O O O O d 0 0 0 0 O N O O O O O O tom- O O N O O O r O O chNNNcJ•d'�h�f' V'�i'd'ci'd'd' V'd'd'et�7'r1'd'd'd'd'd'd'd'd'd'd'�i'�t�Yc1'�f'rt �• 6) (� t� O) 6) 6) (� to O O O O t� O O d O O O d O 6) (� O O O) (3) O d (37 6) O O 6) C3) 6) CL L W h �¢¢a¢aaa¢aa¢¢¢¢aaa¢¢¢¢a¢aaaaaaaaaa¢¢¢ cnUUUVUUUUUUUUUUUUUc.>000UUUUUUVUUUUVUUU a ry W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W w w w W a ¢¢aa¢¢ Za¢¢¢aa <W¢¢¢¢aaWaa¢aaa d za wa¢¢u.wLLU-LL - OI - U- L.LU-U-LL mH -i -U- LI] LL LLwU-LL2U-U- - �LL ¢-i-J.JJa¢Qaa¢ M¢a¢aaa M¢J¢aa¢¢aJ¢QWa¢Q M Ma n,000W Wio�ryW W W W W CWWW W W5WtYWctWWQW W�--ryW W W W W z--- Z Z Z Z Z Z c z z Z Z z z c Z z z z z z z z 2 z z w z z Z c c z U¢QQQ¢¢Qa¢¢m¢Qaa¢a(>3Qa¢¢a¢aQ0¢a0¢Q¢mm< 0000000000 Doom 0 n W W W w w� W W aa¢ w »»> w >0< a <<<w a s 'Q W W W a¢ a¢¢¢ W a a a¢ ¢ Q(Y ¢ 0 °-000dwa Baa L��a� a q)O®OOOOOCL �0 00- cr- z zzzzzzmzzzz z h�---- WOOOWWWWWW0 WWWWSW¢ Owwwwww�} >��ho�¢ ozZZ0OGt0C]0 c��C]aG� o�{yC�C�i��LO� WOQ<Q0000OO 0OJ000 0' wwooUUU JOX¢U �C)C) W J U U U J J J J J J- J J J J a J U U a J J J J J -I 0 J N J J O= 0_D __DD_D 5�=DOCOD —JzwwwwwW Wzwwwm in O N N N M Co LO (D O (D d It' N M M O (D I- f- O d O r r N O O Co CO N OD d I-- I' - Q OD (.D (D (.ej C1' L() CO M Imo- h (- (D L() r ep r c- e-- M r r r r r- 6) CL M r N r r f- CL Li) LO J h J U W f¢ry - J F C W ¢ r) e" CL CLCL� w - ww Q! F -o WI¢.L1H 11 wt0 z � Q� rte, dzc) U) �Q¢a0 �m� -j cw h 5J LL-� Z Z Z � ry n o Q z Ij w Dz w a zU W Ci � t- Q Q paa¢�=? coo �,��w�z o��hlll> �Q� Z-2: j Z zU)U)CO F- zp� ZZzta- j C) r CO r r r r r N r r r r r h. r r r r r LO r CO O O r LO r r O 1— 0 0 0 O O M O O O O O U) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LO rt d O N O O et �f ct�t d d''IT mtet'd'd'd'd'CU IT d 1-dTd'rTLo d' O Q Q <C Q Q <C Q Q Q Q Q Q d <C Q <t d 4 <C J Q d d <C <i Q <t Q U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U Q U U U U U U U U J J J J J J J J _I J _i J J J J J J J J W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W L W Q <t<C <C QQ Q_0Q LL LL U- W LL LL o LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL N LL p < << <<U)<<<<< Q<C <Lw<< p 0QQW LL W W W W W W W W U) Q W' W— Q W W to z!?� z z Z z z z z z z z z w z z r= z m z z> j Z-c� z c < <<< <<<;- Q< <<<O<< M<<02<<t p pQ pQ (v w LL w w to w u) lS U) U) U) fA U) W' U) (A U) U) U) U) U) z z U) U (n U) ft 1111 • • O O O F- < N Q Q O cor- Q 2 00 N 15- � W' W' W' J zozz0VUW Of mac� C� J J J <( m CO 0o W W W (�C>rtf� d tOCON d W W W p W �W W�<ZO QWCD � Q < F: Lf) zz p O,w >Lry mmmco d d b' co M O to CO CO M N M W �- C �t tt ti} O r N N tIS lf? tf7 M O rM i3} O— r M M �' O Q O r O O O O O O O r r r r N N N N N N pr p r r�- r CJ N N CV N N N N N N CV CSI N N N N N p W _ CO CL? C4 CO cc (D CL} CO co (D Co co CO CSS O CO (.0 CO co CO CL? m � r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r�., p *-' W C r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r i 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cl 0 0 0 W' p 0 p r) < O C ) z w r) W 06 > W W°6 z= O O LJJ n � W d W N W® W Q J0U = pt- w� Z< z O N �` C %t_ W s :W Zwo C � Q C C J p W -� 0= Z QJ z C LL (B W w U) U) Lijz C U W U< < <Q F- U <L o <t J U U <� e z <Q W Q O W z J }> U Q = U) 0 d O'��=�WQ=00 U` U)W U)COUC.`7�OS ._ t�UUUU C �t tt ti} O r N N tIS lf? tf7 M O rM i3} O— r M M �' O Q O r O O O O O O O r r r r N N N N N N pr p r r�- r CJ N N CV N N N N N N CV CSI N N N N N p W _ CO CL? C4 CO cc (D CL} CO co (D Co co CO CSS O CO (.0 CO co CO CL? m � r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r�., p *-' W C r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r i 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cl 0 0 0 W' M/a I 00 IV 1p it: ZD 1'4" t f I. `t,/ice td' (/,/r b r �*I ' /� °w' "' '!� r 1 All tot 71 't r `j. n , (r (� W "��` 2a ' r '7 �` 6 ... 7tr17....1!f:' ;;'rt r , AWJQ EMU qyWan " oft -aft 7, T 'j cowl we It t P �Z277�N5�4�- VII ---- - _-. __ l I_. ��y`� `\ `' j`//ft %11�LL� p� /2 N F� ,4 Yr /�/\ °,p \\. � uta i I'"`'� (w, � � ` ..t s �^., xa �= .r//� f,` ".��a'. :'" r---------- M Ul- CL. Lo Q 11 41 Q CL ov 7-7-- STEIWART R D. mmlift:t2l. INSTRUCTIONS: I a ael TO FNT4J*.T'A--1ZtNM 107.1 ,19 CITY OF SAN RAFAEL USE THIS FORM WITH EACH SUBMITTAL OF A CONTRACT AGREEMENT, ORDINANCE OR RESOLUTION BEFORE APPROVAL BY COUNCIL / AGENCY. Raffi Boloyan, Principal PIOnr Community Development May 25, 2012 TITLE OF DOCUMENT: SRRA / SRCC AGENDA ITEM NO. ' D DATE OF MEETING: June 4, 2012 1 Resolution of the San Rafael City Council Adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Approval of a Mitigation Monitoring And Reporting Program (MMRP) for Planned Development - Hillside Overlay District Rezoning And Two Lot Residential Subdivision At 190 El Cerrito Ave (Untermann 2 Lot Subdivision) (APN 011-021-10) 2. An Ordinance of the City Council of the City Of San Rafael Rezoning Certain Real Property from Planned Development (PD) — Hillside Overlay (-H) District (PD -H) to a Revised Planned Development— Hillside Overlay (PD—H) District (ZC1 1-003) for the Subdivision of The Site Into Two Lots and Development of One New Single Family Residence At 190 El Cerrito Ave (Untermann 2 Lot Subdivision) (APN 011-121-10) 3. Resolution of The City Council of the City Of San Rafael Approving a Tentative Parcel Map (Tsl 1- 004) and Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED1 1-047) for the Subdivision of a 6.24 -Acre Lot Developed with a Single Family House Into Two Single Family Residential Lots and Associated Site Improvements Located At 190 El Cerrito Ave (Untermann 2 Lot Subdivision) (APN: 011-121-10) Department Head (signature) NNAURM (LOWER HALF OF FORM FOR APPROVALS ONLY) APPROVED AS COUNCIL 1 AGENCY APPROVED AS TO FORM: AGENDA ITEM: City Manager gnature) City Attorney (signature) NNAURM