HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRB 2014-10-07 #3Meeting Date :
Case Numbers :
Project Planner:
October 7, 2014
ED14-068; UP1 4~
Kraig Tambornj ~ 15)485-3092
Community Development Department -Planning Division Agenda Item No .: __
REPORT TO DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
SUBJECT: 1700 Fourth Street (G Street Mixed Use) -ED14-068 & UP14-020 ; Environmental and
Design Review Permit and Use Permit for a new three-story mixed -use development with 10
apartment un its, 750 square feet of ground floor retai l space and 14 on-s ite park ing spaces
located on a 7,500 square foot parcel in the West End downtown area. APN : 011-192-07;
WEV Zone; Ralph Epstein, Epstein Properties, LLC, Applicant; Hanna Anki, Owner; West End
Neighborhood.
PROPERTY FACTS
Project Site:
North:
South :
East:
West:
Lot Size
West End Village
West End Village
West End Village
West End Village
West End Village
Required : 6,000sf
Proposed : 7,500sf (existing)
Height
Allowed: 30-36 (max height includes 6' bonus)
Proposed : 38 ' (height includes a 2' arch . feature)
Parking
Required: 14
Proposed : 14
Min. Lot Width (New lots)
Required . NA
Proposed : NA
Outdoor Area / Landscape Area
Required : NR
Proposed' Private balcon ies & approx. 3'
landscape planters along frontages
Grading
Total: Minima l for foundation & site prep
WEV
WEV
WEV
WEV
WEV
Lot Coverage (Max.)
Restaurant
VacantJParking/Multi -famlly
Downtown Retail
Downtown Retail
Auto service/sales
Standard: No restriction (100% allowable)
Proposed : Approx. 88% (6,585 square feet)
Residential Density / Gross Building/Floor Area
Allowed : 7 units (base density allowable)
0.70 FAR (5 ,250 square feet al lowable)
Proposed : 10 units (based on 33% state density bonus)
0.10 FAR (750 square feet proposed)
Setbacks
Regu ired Existing Pro[;!osed
Front' None +/-10' 5'
S ide(s): None +/-26'/40' 0'
Ext. side: n/a n/a 10'
Rear : None +/-27' 0'
Tree Removal/Replanting
Total(No Jspecles): 9 mature trees to be removed on site
Proposed : 5 new street trees to be planted
• Hills ide building height is measured from natural grade to top of roof at any g iven po int. Non -hi llside building height
is measured from finished grade pursuant to the "UBC" method .
SUMMARY
The project requires the review and recommendation from the Design Review Board (Board) for a new
mixed-use development in the downtown area. Mixed-use residential development is a permitted use
within the WEV downtown district, when proposed as part of a mixed use project. The proj ect as
proposed complies with residential density , commercial intensity, parking, setback, height, lot coverage
and all related development standards of the subject WEV district. A density bonus is included for t hree
additional market rate units, based on provision of one very low income unit , along with a 6 foot height
bonus and tandem parking allowance ; which is permitted by state and local dens ity bonus provisions.
The project requires no exceptions , variances or other deviations from City zoning code standards . A
use permit is required for mixed -use in order to ensure compliance with the performance -related
development standards listed in San Rafael Municipal Code (SRMC) Section14 .17 .100 .
On July 8, 2014, the Board conducted a conceptual review for this project ; which is requ ired for major
development review under San Rafael Municipal Code Section 1425 .030B. The project requires a
hearing at the Planning Commission leve l. Staff has concluded that the design is generally consistent
with the WEV area criteria and standards . Formal comment and recommendation is requested on the
project design details, specifically with regard to comments provided at the conceptual review meeting
and as discussed in this report, illcluding the architectural tower feature that exceeds the height limit.
BACKGROUND
Existing/Prior Land Uses
The site is currently developed with a small restaurant building and outdoor patio area (aka, Hanna's).
The site was originall y deve loped as a service stat ion , wh ich was abandoned , converted to an ice
cream parlor in the 1970's (permit 5137 issued 10-21 -74), and subsequently into a restaurant use. The
underground fuel tanks associated with the prior service station use were required to be abandoned per
Fi re Department requirements (per use perm it U P7 4-120). Will Bono Environmental Services prepared
a Soil and Groundwater Investigation Report, February 6, 1998, that found no detectable levels of
hydrocarbon contamination to soil and groundwater on the site . The determination has been made that
no negative Impact to groundwater exists No further action has been deemed necessary.
West End Neighborhood Environs
The West End Village neighborhood is characterized by older and historic one and two story
commercial and mixed-use structures with a prominent retail street frontage . The majority of the
buildings along Fourth Street are built to the property li nes with floor leve ls prov ided in the same plane ,
offset with architectural details such as cornices and window treatments . Interior wa l ls are masonry and
wood, with varied styles but IYlOst commonly comprised of blank walls where the building is along an
interior boundary . The area anticipates more intense building development in two and three-story
structures New development with mixed -use with ground floor retail is encouraged and antiCipated to
cont inue the predom i nant development pattern of the area.
Prior Staff/Cily Reviews
In April , 2014 the City provided comments on a pre-application request for the proposed project which
included review of the parking layout , site density and nonresidential intensity . The applicant was
directed to submit for conceptual review, in accordance with San Rafael Municipal Code Chapter 14 .25.
In July, 2014, the Design Review Board conducted conceptual review of the project, received public
comments, and prov ided the following comments :
• The Board expressed general support for the project.
• Incorporating landscaping planters in front of the building is supported .
• Preserve the trees along the frontages if possible (arborist review recommended).
• If it is not feasible to preserve the trees on-site , consider using a Sycamore as street tree to
preserve the tail , tree-l ined character of the WEV ne ighborhood area.
2
.. The parking supply may be inadequate for conditions, and shared parking may be difficult to
support. Provide study of this concept. [Note: The proiect has been revised to eliminated the
need for shared parkingl
.. Consider revised layouts of parking and/or unit sizes and commercial area to meet parking
demand without shared parking. [Note: The project has been revised to eliminated the shared
need for shared parkingl
.. Consider removing the garage opening on Fourth Street and limit access to the G Street side.
.. Show the building in context with the surrounding buildings to allow review of compatibility with
other WEV streetscape and character
.. Suggest "easing" the third level if necessary to be in context with surrounding buildings; e.g.,
consider setback for third story portions, but maintain the tower feature.
.. Consider including units in one level to provide more housing opportunities for a broader
demographic.
II Consider setting entry gate back (if it open and close during the day) -though it was also noted
this could result in undesirable lOitering or litter problems. Otherwise, if left open during the day
then no setback is necessary.
.. Assure the former underground fuel storage tank has been removed in accordance with
standards and that the site is "clean" environmentally.
.. Consider exchanging the lobby and apartment entry with parking spaces 6, 7, & 8.
Inter-Departmental Reviews
The project has also been reviewed by all City departments, and no significant site or building design
issues were initially Identified. Public Works staff has required that garage gates be set back 20 feet
from the right of way, and landscape planters along the frontage must be removed from the right of way
(i.e., reduced in depth). Building Division has identified a need for potential revision to the proposed
accessible parking layout and dimensions. The applicant is working on addressing these comments
before the project is scheduled for Planning Commission review. If significant project design changes
result, further review by the Board may be required.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Use
The project consists of demolition of the existing commercial structures (I.e., Hanna's restaurant, shed
and covered patio structure), and eight (8) on-site paved parking spaces for new construction of a new
mixed-use building with 10 unit apartments in two levels, 750 square feet of ground floor retail, and 14
covered parking spaces. As proposed, the number of parking spaces includes two (2) tandem spaces,
which are allowed under the state and local density bonus reg ulatlons (SRMC 14.16). The mixed-use
site is approximately 73' by 96' (7,500 square foot) and within the downtown WEV district and West
End neighborhood area. The units would include nine (9) 1-bedroom units and one (1) 2-bedroom unit,
ranging in size from 920 to 1,350 gross square feet.
Site Plan
The building proposes zero lot line setbacks from the interior side and rear property lines. Balcony and
awnings would project from the building, which would maintain a landscaped five-foot setback from its
property line on Fourth Street and 10 foot setback along G Street (as noted above, the landscape
planters would have to be revised so that they do not encroach within the right of way). The main entry
to the residential units faces G St, and entry to the commercial space is at the corner of G and Fourth.
The parking garage area would have one-way circulation with the entry from G Street and exit onto
Fourth Street.
Height
The project includes a six-foot (6') height increase above the WEV district 30-foot height limit, which is
permitted for development that includes affordable housing units. The project is pursuing a density
3
bonus of 3 add
addition,
at
the Comm
Architecture
ANALYSIS
Zoning Ordinance
~ Height
The site is
increase
building
on provision of 1 unit as affordable to very low income . In
Uj..,Il.J;:>o;;,;:> an additional two-foot (2') height increase for an architectural tower
corner, which can permitted If recommended by the Board and by
a two color building with matte blue and green
canvas above aluminum storefront windows,
building decorative corbels, vinyl windows, slatted metal
orODOIi80 at second and third levels
Plan 2020 policies, including the underlying West
supports and encourages mixed use housing development. The
implemented by adoption and application of the adopted
below. In general, in-fill development that is
nation, and zoning standards adopted to
the objectives, goals and policies of the general plan
the applicable General Plan 2020 policies for the Planning
a project for consistency with the General Plan, the
competing goals and policies. The Commission shall
to one policy over another in order to implement all pertinent
Plan, on balance,
pertinent zoning ordinance design criteria
to General Plan Exhibit 9. A six-foot (6') height
affordable housing; subject to either a use
for a project that provides
(in circumstances, an exception can be considered
1 16.120 permits architectural features to be
through the review process, Staff further supports a 2'
feature, which helps distinguish the
~ Residential Density
The mixed-use project is
nonresidential floor area
1,000 sf of site area. ~~,.~_
zoning regulations, which establishes a 0.70
'1'"\\A/<>n>F'C for one (1) residential unit per
density bonus table 1 16.030-1, a rental housing
4
development would qualify for a 33% increase over the base density by providing 1-2 units as
affordable to low and/or very low income residents . The project density and commercial use are
both supported as appropriate in the WEV district.
~ Design Criteria.
The WEV Zone District, Section 14 .05 .010, lists the following criteria for a mixed-use development:
• Existing Character. The West End is an older commercial village adjacent to several
neighborhoods. Small-scale shops and restaurants and small businesses along Fourth Street
provide convenience goods and seNices to the nearby residential areas as well as specialty
retail shopping opportunities for the wider San Rafael community.
• Allowed Uses. The West End Village will continue to be a unique and desirable place to shop
and live . A variety of goods and seNices is encouraged, ranging from one-of-a-kind shops,
neighborhood-seNing offices and services, family and youth-oriented entertainment activities,
and restaurants . New parking areas are strongly encouraged. Limits on drive-up facilities and
late-night activity protect the livability in the West End Village, and promote an attractive
pedestrian setting. Mixed-use residential development is encouraged.
e Design Intent. Infill development should remain compatible with the area's historic low-scale
pattern and character. New buildings will typically range from one to two (2) stories with
opportunities for occasional three (3) stories, mixed-use commerciallresidential buildings which
complement the older buildings in the district
Design preferences are very subjective and can vary sign ificantly. Therefore, the design criteria are
intended to assure high-quality materials are used with a well-articulated and detailed building that
would be found to complement and enhance the City character. Existing design styles and particularly
predominant streetscape patterns are encouraged to be respected. The City zoning and design cnteria
permit the proposed building scale, height and intensity.
Staff has concluded that the project has responded to the prior conceptual design review comments,
specifically with respect to the building design, scale, mass and height. The plans and materials
submitted for formal review have included perspectives showing the building in relation to adjacent
structures that appear to show the new bui lding wou ld be in scale with the adjacent downtown
structures. The applicant has maintained the residential entry on G Street, and retained the two level
unit designs, and garage entry locations as previously presented. No issues with the building design
details or the overall height and mass have been ident ified .
Chapter 14.18 Parking
The site currently maintains on-site parking for the existing commercial use. Therefore, off-street
parking for the nonresidential portion of the mixed-use development would be required to be
maintained . Pursuant to SRMC Chart 14 .18 .040 the project would generate maximum demand for off-
street parking, as follows:
1 space per 250 gross retail building area = 3 spaces
1 space for each 1 bedroom unit = 9 spaces
1.5 space for each 2 bedroom unit = 2 spaces
TOTAL 14 Spaces
Guest parking would typically be required for this project given that it lies within 200 feet of a residential
HR1 district. However, the guest parking requirement may be waived upon request pursuant to the
state density bonus regulations (based on the fact that the project is proposing affordable units). In
addition, the project may propose tandem parking pursuant to the state density bonus regulations .
Staff has not identified any specific site design issues with the proposed parking layout However,
Public Works has requ ired that the proposed gates be set back 20 feet from the back of sidewalk .
5
Chapter 14.17.100
The Performance Standards, Section 14.17 100 (administrative use permit review for mixed-use
development), requires review of mixed use projects for compliance with the following standards:
> Location. In the 4SRC and WEV districts, residential units may be located above tl1e ground floor,
and on rear portions of the ground. Location of residential units in the 213 MUE and MUW, GC,
FBWC, HO, C/O, CSMU, M and NC districts shaJl be determined through project review.
> Access. Residential units shall have a separate and secured entrance and exit.
>-. Parking. Residential parking shaJJ comply with Chapter 14. 18, Parking Standards, of this title.
>-Noise. Residential units shall meet the residential noise standards in Section 14.16.260, Noise
standards, of this title.
» Ligl1ting. All exterior Jighting shall be sufficient to establish a sense of well-being to the pedestrian
and one that is sufficient to facilitate recognition of persons at a reasonable distance. Type and
placement of lighting sha11 be to the satisfaction of the police deparlment. The minimum of one foot-
candle at ground level shall be provided in 6111 exterior doorways and vehicle parking areas.
» Refuse Storage and Location. An adequate refuse storage area shall be provided for the residential
use.
>-Location of new residential units shall consider existing surrounding uses in order to minimize
impacts from existing uses.
No issues with the performance standards have been identified in either the prior conceptual or current
formal design proposal. Preliminary geotechnical and environmental assessments have been provided
which indicate the site is suitable for the proposed development,
Chapter 14.25
The Design Review, Section 14.25.050, establishes the following general criteria:
» Plans shall be prepared by a design professional designated legally competent under the building
code. » Development should be related accordant to existing development in the vicinity. The colors,
materials, scale and design of structures in the area should be considered. Design elements and
approaches should include: Creation of interest in the elevation, pedestrian oriented design, sense
of entry, variation in building placement and height, ADA accessibility requirements, energy
efficiency, equal attention to all sides of buildings, sensitivity to highly visible locations, orient
bedrooms/patios to avoid noise sources, consider usable acfjve areas, etc.
» There should be consistent organization of materials and a balanced relationship of major
elements. Colors and materials should be of high quality, consistent with the surrounding and avoid
highly contrasting colors or finishes.
> Provide good vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian circulation and access.
>-Entrances to garages should be well defined.
>-The design shall give due regard of the orientation of structures to the street and climatic
considerations.
>-Proper site drainage systems shall be included.
» utility connections shall be installed underground.
>-Refuse coJlection areas shaJJ be screened, and provide adequate ingress and egress.
>-Exterior lighting should be adequate for safety of building occupants but avoid creating off-site
spiIJover or glare impacts.
>-Consider sign age needs in the design concept.
Based on review of the prior conceptual review and revised formal plan submittal, staff has concluded
that the design approach responds adequately to these pertinent criteria. The project includes outdoor
usable space, which is encouraged. Projections are considered to be appropriate for downtown mixed-
use development. The proposed balcony and awning projections can be supported. The plan includes
handicap parking and bike storage areas.
6
No lighting or signage concerns have been identified. Lighting would be subject to a post-installation
review to assure no glare or spillover onto adjacent properties would result Signage for the downtown
area typically is required to be individual letters placed on the building wall with indirect or halo
illumination. Internally illuminated letter, box and cabinet signs are discouraged in general and
particularly within the downtown area.
The applicant has presented an evaluation of the on-site trees which has concluded that it would not be
feasible to preserve the existing trees. New street trees are recommended that would match the
existing palette implemented by the City on Fourth Street. The Board may recommend an alternative
species for the Planning Commission and Public Works Department to consider.
San Rafael Design Guidelines:
In addition to the specific zoning criteria listed above, the nonresidential design guidelines may be used
for guidance and to ensure compliance with the General Plan 2020 design criteria. The pertinent
nonresidential design guidelines criteria are attached. These guidelines support providing strong
relationship with the street frontage, and for including details to reduce perceived building height in this
location. The Board may provide further comments on the project with respect to these design criteria.
No issues have been identified by staff.
NEIGH BORHOOD CORRESPON D ENC E
Notice of the meeting was posted on-site and mailed to residents within 300 feet, the Downtown
Business Improvement District and the Federation of San Rafael Neighborhoods at least 15 days prior
to the meeting date. Comments were previously received and considered for th~ conceptual review.
Concerns were raised with bulk and mass, whether the new building scale and design would be
compatible with the existing neighborhood and whether the use would conflict with existing adjacent
uses. Any comments received for the formal review will be forwarded to the Design Review Board.
CONCLUSION
The City zoning and design criteria permit the proposed building scale, height and intensity. Design
preferences are very subjective and can vary significantly. Therefore, the design criteria are intended to
assure high-quality materials are used with a well-articulated and detailed building that would be found
to complement and enhance the City character, Existing design styles and particularly predominant
streetscape patterns are encouraged to be respected. In this case, the Board expressed support for the
conceptual plan details, colors, materials, setbacks and architectural features, with the suggestion to
consider setback for upper story levels with a study of the building in relation to adjacent structures.
Staff concludes that the project addresses all of the applicable zoning development standards and
design criteria, and appears to have responded to the recommendations and comments provided at the
July 2014 conceptual review meeting. The Board is asked to provide its formal recommendation on the
project to the Planning Commission.
EXHIBITS
1. Vicinity Map
2. Arborist Inspection of Trees
3. San Rafael "Non-residential" Design Guidelines Criteria excerpts
4. Building Height Exhibit
5. Prior Concept Review Plan Set (11x17 inch size)
6. Project Plan Set (11 x17 inch size)
cc: Epstein Properties, Applicant
Hanna Anki, Owner
7
Exhibit 1 -Vicinity Map 1700 Fourth Street
SCALE 1 : 3 ,212
200 0 20 0 400
I 'Ll I
600
Thursday, October 02, 20 149 ,53 AM
Exhibit 2
San Rafael Design G ui delines
NONRESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES
As modifications are made to San Rafael, whether through public improvements or as private
developmen t affects neighborhoods or the Downtown, the design quality of these changes should
improve the quality of life in San Rafael. These guidelines provide a framework of design principles
that builds on the strength of th e existing character of an area and that strives to improve the
visual unity of the area.
Parking Lots
.:. A logica l seque nce of entry and arrival as part of the site's design should be provided .
• :. W he re possible, design en trances from the str eet to direct vi ews towards the building
ent ry .
• :. Park ing should be distributed to provide easy access to building e ntra nces .
• :. Where possible, parkin g should be located to the rea r or side of a buildin g in order t o
red uce the visua l impact o f parkin g areas .
• :. Desi gn fo r adequate vehicle maneuvera bility in parking areas. Vehicles shou ld not bac k out
fro m a parking space onto t he street.
.:. Parkin g areas should be screened from th e street with hed ges, walls, fences or berms,
subject to securi ty co nsi de rat ions .
• :. On ma jor arteria ls , where possible and appropri ate, consoli date cu rb cuts and reduce ent ry
and exit co nflicts .
• :. Auto and pede stria n entrances into th e developmen t should be easy to find . Fo r exa mple,
special e ntry treatments, such as colored con crete, special plan ting an d si gnage sho uld be
located at th e e ntries t o the site .
• :. Shade trees should be provided in par king lots per the zoning ord inance.
Landscaping
.:. Landscaped areas shoul d be pl a nned as i ntegra l parts of the develo pment and to create a
strongly landscaped character fo r th e site .
• :-Unsigh tly uses sh ou ld be screened .
• :. Com mercial signage or displays sho ul d not be hidd en wi th lands caping .
• :. Trees should be pla nted in a variety of locations, such as alo ng t he side property li nes,
clustered in pl antin g areas, or distr ibu ted t hro ugh o ut the parking lo t, cons is tent wi th the
zonin g ordina nce.
5
San Rafael Design Guidelines
.:. Pedestrian areas should be made visually attractive with special planting and flowering
trees .
• :. Where feasible, landscape the area between the buil ding and the property lin e even when
a building is located at the minimum required side or rear yard setback .
• :. Retain and maintain existing public street trees and add additional street trees where
practical.
Lighting
.:. Limit the intensity of lighting to provide for adequate site security and for pedestrian and
vehic ula r safety .
• :. Shield light sources to prevent glare and illumination beyond the boundaries of the
property .
• :. Lighting fixtures should complement the architecture of the project.
Pedestria n Ci rculation
.:. Consider pedestrian orientation when designing building entries, windows, signage and
doors .
• :. I nclude a well-defined pedestrian walkway between the street and building entries .
• :. Clearly define pedestrian movement through the parking lot. For example, provide
changes in pavement or separate landscaped walkways .
• :. Where appropriate, pedestrian walkways should be provided between adjacent lots .
• :. Spec ia l design elements should be included, such as bollards, pots, benches, trash cans,
unique paving, tree grates, tree guards and pedestrian lighting to add visual ricllness to
areas designed for pedestrian access .
• :. Where appropriate, include outdoor gathering p la ces and seating for the pub lic.
.:. Adequate f acilities should be provided for bicycle parking, consistent with zoning
requirements.
Building Form
.:. Where appropriate, locate the building, or a substantial portion of the building along the
front yard setback or street edge to create spatial enclosure in relation to the street.
.:. Consider the pedestrian experience when designing the ground floor of buildings .
• :. A continuity of design, materials, color, form and architectural details is encouraged for all
portions of a building and between all the buildings on the site .
• :. Consider the development's visual and spatial relationship to adjacent buildin gs and other
structures in the area .
6
Sa~~~!§l_~~_Design Guideline_~_. __________________________ _
Entryways
.:. A defin ed sense of en try with pedestrian ori entation sho uld be provided .
• :. Bu ildi ng en trances sh oul d be defined wi t h archi te ct ural elemen t s su ch as ro of form
chan ges, awnings or other architectura l elements .
Towers
.:. If a t ower is included in the design, it sho uld pe rfor m a definite on-site function, such as
delin~at in g an e ntrance to a site or a bui ld in g entry, or em pha si zin g a di splay wi ndow .
• :. The towe r should provide an attractive disti nctive silhouette ag ains t th e sky .
• :. Wh e re appropria t e, th e visual bu lk of the u pp er pO ltion of the tower shou ld be re du ced to
reduce its a pparent bu lk, for example with openings throu gh it or wit h open latticewo rk.
Arcades
.:. Arcades may be used i n shoppi ng areas to provide weather protection f or shoppers, add a
sense of unity to a larger project and/or provide de pth to th e bu ildi ng .
• :. Arcades may be toppe d with a sim ple broad ba nd fo r t enan t sig ni ng .
• :. Internal illu minati on may be used to em phasize arcade forms at night.
Awnings
.:. Where ap propriate, prov id e well-designed aw ni ngs to enha nce t he design of the bui lding,
provide we ath er protection, and add liveliness , interest and a sense of hum an scale .
• :. Prov id e a uniform treatm ent of aw nings o n multi-tenant buildings .
• :. Awn in g colors may be varied an d should be compatible with th e colors of the buildin g and
of adja cent bu ildings .
• :. Sig ns ma y be provided on an awni ng, co ns istent w ith the zoning ordi nance .
• :. T ransl uce nt, in ternally ill u minated awnin gs are not enco urag ed .
• :. Th e fo llowing buildi ng code standards are in clude d for reference :
Minim um height above grade : 8 feet; 14 feet at alleys, parking lots or other areas with
vehicul a r traffi c
Maximum hor iz on tal projection (from face of building): 7 feet, o r 66% of t he distance
between t he building and cu rb, whichever is less
Minim um distance t o curb: 2 feet between the awn in g and curb
Materials and Colors
.:. Use articula tion , t exturin g an d detai ling on all concrete exposed to exte rior view .
• :. Exteri or materials should mi nim ize refle ctivity .
• :. Use color to provi de appro priate acc ents on a build ing.
7
San Rafael Desig n Guideli nes
DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR DOWNTOWN AND FOURTH STREET IN THE
MONTECITO I HAPPY VALLEY NEIGH BORHOOD
Downtown San Rafael IS the urban heart of Marin County and is a livable and walkable place
where people gather to enjoy life or conduct business . Downtown has a physical aspect
described as \Ihometown'~ New development contributes to the beautification and vitality of
Downtown. Downtown is increasingly attractive with more landscaping and trees. These
guidelines ensure that new buildings will be well designed, will respect our historic heritage and
will be attractive to pedestrians.
Montecito/Happy Valley neighborhood is in a convenient commercial location adjacent to
Highway 101 and along Seco n d, Third and Fourth Streets, and connecting to Downtown San
Rafae/. With more than 400 diverse businesses, i t is a mix ed-use medium density community,
and an alternative to au to -oriented suburbs. The neighborhood's commercial anchor is
Montecito Shopping Center, with Trader Joe's, restaurants, Rite-Aid, and a canalfront walkway.
Fourth Street is a commercia/link to Downtown with a wide range of office, service and retail
uses.
Th e map below in di cates the various areas of Downtown and Fourth Street and in the
Montecito/Happy Valley Neighbo r hood to which t he following guidelines are applicable.
--,. \ ." \_ . I
'"'\--,... . f
7 '--c..,
8
San Rafael Design Guidelines
--------"'--------------------------
Active Pedestrian and Commercial Streets
Fo urth Street and portions of cross streets close to Fourth are active, pedestrian friendly shopping
and mixed use areas . The inten ts here are t o enliven these commercial and mixed use areas by
encouraging window shopping; by orienting buildings to the street to increase street activity; by
incfuding usable, active public plazas; by minimizing parking lots and dr i veways which interrupt t he
pedestrian flow; and by encouraging appropriate signage.
Street Edge Pattern
.:. Buildi ngs should be located to re inforce the street edge ..
• :. Mu ch of the front or st r eet side facades of th e groun d floor shoul d extend t o t he property
line, w ith exceptions fo r public pl azas, ou td oor gathe ring places, cou rtya rd s or la nd scap e
setba cks.
Driveways and Parking Area s
.:. Dri veway cuts and widths sh o uld be minimized, an d gro und level or st r uctured parki ng
shoul d be place d behind bui ldi ngs.
Building Entrances
.:. T he pr imary groun d fioo r entran ces sh o uld be orie nt ed t owards the street or, if
appropriate, pu blic plazas or cou rtyards, and not t o pa rking lots .
• :. Groun d flo or entri es should be f re q uen t.
.:. En t ries sho ul d be well-define d and well lit for pedestria n safety.
Windows
.:. Larg e sto refro nt window displ ay at'e as s hould be p rovi d ed at the street leve l on buil d i ngs
(i.e., approximately 75% cle ar glass on th e primary street level f rontage).
Build i ng Desig n
.:. Bui ld ing desig n sho ul d provide interest a nd variety at t he stree t level t hrough awn ings,
ma rqu ees , entri es a nd display w indows .
• :. Lo ng, monotono us, unin t errupt ed wa ll s sh o uld be avoided .
• :. Prov ide d iffere nces in fac;ad e treat ment between grou nd level and upp er leve ls t o ad d
visu al interes t to t he buil di ng a nd th e pedes t ria n expe r ience.
9
San Rafael Design Guidelines
Public Spaces and Courtyards
.:. Public spaces are an integral part of the pedestrian circulation system, and should not be
separated from the sidewalk w ith walls or stairs .
• :. Other sides of the public space should provide a sense of enclosure, for example, define
edges with buildings, landscaping, street furniture, railings or fencing .
• :. Public spaces should be adequately landscaped and should include street furniture .
• :. Public spaces should be located to take advantage of sun l ight and shield wind exposure .
• :. Shopping or eating opportunities are encouraged within or adjacent to public spaces .
Landscaping
.:. Colorful, small scale plants, includ i ng hanging plants, are encouraged in small areas along
the street front for variety and interest or to define building entries .
• :. Artificial plants are discouraged.
Height
.:. Multi-story bu i ld ings on the south side of Fourth Street should include step backs or other
design techniques to retain sunny sidewalk areas on the north side of the street.
.:. Height should be min i mized through methods such as building colors, upper-story step-
backs, and placing units under eaves .
Fifth/Mission District and Environs
In this area of Downtown, providing a pleasant walking environment comfortable for people at the
ground level is important. These streets are less active, and attractive streets to stroll along.
Building Design
.:. To provide visual interest, long, monotonous walls should be aVOided .
• :. Where retaining walls are needed, they should be low, or terraced and landscaped .
• :. Entries should be well defined and orient to the street rather than to a parking lot.
Setbacks
.:. Where setbacks are provided, they should be landscaped .
• :. Street trees are an important element and should be retained and enhanced.
Residential Design
.:. Residential build i ng types that are oriented to and bring vital ity to the street are
encouraged. Building types include townhouse and podium apartments with garages no
more than '/2 level above grade.
10
Exhibit 3
I
RBOR L OGIC
CONSULTING AR80RISTS
415.753.5022.236 WEST PORTAL AVE. #311, SAN FRANCISCO. CA 94U7. lIasCOI@arborlogic.com
SERVICE: ARBORIST ASSESSMENT OF SYCAMORE TREE REPLACEMENT
REPORT DATE: August 21, 2014
INSPECTION LOCATION: 1700 Fourth Street, San Rafael, California
ARBORISTS: James La scot, James Reed
CLIENT/FIRM: Mr. Ralph S. Epstein / Epstein Properties, LLC
PURPOSE/ISSUE: Arborist discussion on why we do not recommend replacing proposed
sycamore tree removals with sycamore replacements.
DISCUSSION: The subject sycamore or London plane trees (Platanus acerifofia) are
mature trees that would require removal under the proposed development. We were
asked to make recommendations regarding suggested replacement tree species. We did
not recommend sycamore species as replacement trees because of the following:
1. They are susceptible to Anthracnose leaf blight and powdery mildew that occur
on foliage during seasons with late spring rains. Although they do not harm
healthy trees, they are aesthetically unappealing. There are some cultivated
strains that are less susceptible to these fungi but none are immune.
2. The seed pods are sharply pointed, hard, and round and can cause trip hazards.
3. They grow larger than is appropriate for the spaces provided. These trees can
grow over 60 feet in height and have canopies over 25 feet wide at maturity.
We have recommended the following replacements:
• crepe myrtle (Lagerstroemia indica) as a first choice of replacement species
because they do well in this area of San Rafael with much heat and sunlight, do
not normally grow over 25 feet tall as street trees, have colorful flowering
throughout the summer months, and are consistent with other street trees in
the area.
• Aristocrat pear (Pyrus cal/eryana 'Aristocrat') as a secondary replacement
species because they do well in this area of San Rafael, do not normally grow
over 25 feet tall as street trees, have colorful flowering in early spring
(January/February) and attractive fall color.
C\...za-"-"'''''1~(7-' .. _--.. -
James Lascot
Principal/Consulting Arborist
~
James Reed
Associate Arborist ISA WE-10237A
A RBOR OGle
CONSULTING ARBORISTS
415.753.5022.236 WE5T PORTAL AVE.llll1, SA.N FRANCISCO, CA 94127. jlascot@arborlogic.com
JAMES LAScor -CONSUL r/NG ARBOR/ST
Experience in the arboriculturallndustry, San Francisco Bay Area for over 33 years.
Consulting Arborist: 18 years specializing in tree protection during development with
other services to include providing tree management plans for large government and
commercial properties; tree protection plans for developers and designers;
construction su pervision; tree hazard assessments; pru ning specifications; diagnosis;
treatment of diseases.
Consulting Experience:
" Expert witness, approximately 50 cases
" Prepared over 1000 written reports .
" Assessment of over 200,000 trees.
" Providing tree management for over 100,000 trees throughout consulting
career.
" Estimator for loca I trees services for 5 years
" Tree foreman / climberfor 15 years
" International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) Certified Arborist -No. 2110 (1996-
2010)
" American Society of Consulting Arborists (ASCA) Arboricultural Consulting
Academy Graduate (Class of 1997)
" International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) Tree Worker -no . 830 (expired)
JAMES REED -CONSUL T1NG ARBOR/ST
Experience in the arboricultural industry throughout the United States for over 10 years .
" Tree foreman / climber for 10 years
.. International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) Certified Arborist -WE-10237A
I\R80R L OGIC
CONSULTING ARBORISTS
415.753.5022.236 WEST PORTAL AVE. U311, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94127 .lIascot@~rborlogl(.com
REPORT DATE: July 19, 2014
SERVICE: ARBORIST INSPECTION OF SYCAMORE TREES AT 1700 4 TH STREET
INS PECTION LOCATION: 1700 Fo u rth Street, Sa n Rafa el, Ca liforn ia
INSPECTION DATE: July 15, 2014
ARBORISTS: James Lascot, James Reed
CLIENT/FIRM: Mr. Ralph S. Epstein / Epstein Properties, LLC
PURPOSE/ISSUE: Arborist assessment of the proposed developments impact on the
existing sycamore trees.
INSPECTION / REPORT TYPE: Visual inspection from the ground without excavation,
coring, boring or sampling. This is an abbreviate report and more detailed report can
be produced upon request.
TREE MAP: None created, see Site Map for tree locations.
RESOURCES: Topographic Survey 6/23/14 and Conceptual Site Study 7/16/14
SUBJECT TREES:
Seven London Plane 'Sycamore' (Platanus acerlfolia)
TRUNK DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT (4.5 feet above 5011 grade): Various 1.2JJ-16"
HEALTH: Good, no apparent signs of Significant pests or disease .
DISCUSSION: The subject sycamore trees are mature trees located just inside of the
sidewalk area and along the existing fence. The proposed development is a structure
that will have its foundation at the location of this existing fence. The proposed
foundation would require the removal of all roots and part of their trunks on one side
of each tree. This root removal would result in an approximate root loss offifty-percent
(50%) on each tree. This much root loss is unsustainable and would result in the severe
decline and death of each tree. The foundation would also require removal of part of
the trunks from each tree amounting to a trunk los5 of approximately ten-percent
(10%). This trunk loss would cause internal decay and, accompanied with the proposed
root loses, result in compromising the structural integrity of these trees and would be in
high risk for collapse.
CONCLUSION: These trees would succumb to significant and severe impacts from the
proposed development and these trees require removal under the proposed plans.
RECOMMENDATIONS: Removal of these trees for the proposed development.
Page 2 of 3
PHOTOGRAPH 1 -One sycamore tree located on the southwest most portion of the
property. Note: The trunk of this tree is within the existing fence line and proposed
building f oun dation.
Page 3 of 3
PHOTOGRAPH 2 -One sycamore tree located on the southwest portion of the prop erty.
Note : The trunk of this tree is within the existing fence line and proposed building
foundat ion.
James Lascot
Principal/Consulting Arborist
James Reed
Associate Arborist ISA WE-10237A