Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission 2015-09-29 #2REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION -Case No: S14-001/LLA14-002 Page 2 development intensity would likely be reduced to only two lots. In any case, any resulting lots still would likely result in encroachments into the setback area; which would preclude any improvements. Staff has determined that the unique attributes of the creek area would warrant the proposed modification to the setback, consistent with provisions of the zoning code. All referenced reports, studies and plans have been reviewed by the City for adequacy and are contained in the project file. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution conditionally approving a Lot Line Adjustment and Tentative Parcel Map for a three lot residential subdivision. PROPERTY FACTS Site Characteristics General Plan Designation Zoning Designation I Existing Land-Use Project Site: Low Density Residential R5 Vacant North: Low Density Residential R5 Single-Family South: Low Density Residential R5 Single-Family East: Low Density Residential R5 Single-Family West: Public/Quasi Public PD Cemetery Site Description/Setting: OveNiew The site is an approximately %-acre parcel that is adjacent to Mount Tamalpais Cemetery, intersected by a creek tributary, and formerly used as a memorial stone business. The property and adjacent cemetery site were recently annexed into the City in 2011. The site maintains a slight upslope from the street, but is relatively level. A prior one-story commercial structure and materials associated with the memorial stone business were removed from the property a few years ago, leaving a vacant site. The previously disturbed site contains remnant hardscape improvements. Lot grades, including the current creek banks along the channel, are presumed to have been established as a result of historic fill and/or grading that occurred many years ago; prior to or at the time of development of the residential area and cemetery property (as discussed further below). Creek Tributary The natural Mahon Creek tributary runs through the property and carries drainage runoff from the hillside to the north east, including the cemetery property. This creek channel consists of an exceptionally wide, flat creek bed in this section of the creek, which exits the property to the south where it enters an enclosed conduit until it passes Shannon Lane at Fifth Avenue to west of the site. Further downstream the creek exits an enclosed drain pipe, in a narrow creek channel with well-defined high creek banks. An approved jurisdictional determination (delineation of the waterway boundaries), was provided for the site by US Army Corp of Engineers on February 14, 2013 (File No. 2012-00298N). The extent of the Mahon Creek bank on the property has been defined by the project engineer. State Department of Fish and Wildlife reviewed and confirmed that development falls outside of riparian areas and would not encroach within the defined creek bank (confirmed through a 'Refund of Streambed Alteration Notification' letter, dated August 26, 2015, contained in the project file). A drainage outfall is located on the west side of the property that carries water from the hillside watershed to the west. The outfall exits a pipe that would continue to run under the flag lot, before water enters the Mahon Creek tributary. This area is designated as wetland waters of the US on the Army Corps jurisdictional map, and REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION -C,ase No: S14-001/LLA14-002 Page 3 is comprised of a man-made drainage outfall and ditch. Another drainage pipe exists on the east side of the property, which carries drainage from the street to the creek. Drainage conditions were summarized in a Hydrology Study prepared by Oberkamper and Associates, December 14, 2012 and revised for this project dated September 26,2014. These studies have been used to prepare the drainage improvements and document the existing plus future conditions. The site consists of 0.8 acres of a total. watershed of 59.5 acres (largely consisting of Mt Tamalpais Cemetery) which enters the creek across the site. As mentioned above, runoff currently crosses the site through storm drain pipes in two locations, before entering the creek. No change to the creek area is proposed. The report confirms that the creek channel has a low velocity flow in a wide channel, flowing across shallow terrain, and that the project would minimally impact the existing drainage pattern and conditions. Post development would maintain the same rate of pre-construction and would not alter the creek drainage condition. This report format and content have been received and accepted by Public Works as accurately describing the site and project conditions. Illustrations of the creek channel and anticipated 100 year water level are provided on Sheet C3 of the project plans. The reports are contained in the project file. Soils Conditions Soils conditions were reviewed and described by Nersi Hemati, GE, in a report dated September 29, 2014. This report included 2 boring samples taken from each proposed home site. The report was supplemented by Salem Howes Associate (SHA), dated May 18, 2015. This subsequent report was prepared to further evaluate the existing drainage culvert inlet and northerly draw feature on proposed Lot 3. The SHA investigation concluded that the drainage inlet and "draw" located on Lot 3 did not exist prior to 1950, and likely resulted from historic grading associated with development of the cemetery and residential lots in the 1970's and 1980's. The draw is not related to any historic drainage features. The site has been documented as stable and could support placement of fill in the northerly "draw" which is being proposed to further stabilize the proposed building pad for Lot 3. The geotechnical reports have been accepted as adequate by Public Works and Planning for project review, are contained in the project file, and referenced in the attached June 15, 2015 WRA letter (Exhibit 3). BACKGROUND As noted in the site description above, the property was formerly used for a memorial stone business. An existing creek running through the property has been delineated and reviewed by the US Army Corp of Engineers and State Department of Fish and Wildlife, which are responsible for establishing and assuring protections of creeks, waterways and wildlife. Consultation with these agencies has occurred and confirms that development, as proposed, would not encroach into sensitive habitat areas of the creek. The application was complete for processing and the preliminary CEQA determination was made following the conclusion of consultation with State Department of Fish and Wildlife which was resolved August 26,2015. Zoning research letter and pre-application reviews were completed for the property in 2011, 2013 and 2014. The pre-application reviews included recommendations regarding creek and drainage setbacks. There have been no prior formal zoning approvals for development or use requested for this site. The top of creek bank and the jurisdictional boundary of the US Army Corp of Engineers have been established, which identifies the area as non-wetland waters. The property is in the R5 low density single-family residential area and carries a minimum base denSity for 2 lots and maximum base density for 6 lots. As a minor subdivision of four or fewer lots, the project could be reviewed by the Community Development Director. However, given the site conditions and constraints occurring due to the proximity of the project to the creek and its banks, this subdivision request is not considered routine. Therefore, staff has referred this matter to the Planning Commission, consistent with the provisions of San Rafael Municipal Code (SRMC) Title 15 (Subdivisions). REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION -Case No: S14-001/LLA14-002 Page 4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project includes the following requests : Lot Line Adjustment (LLA 14-002): Request to transfer property along the side boundary line between the 34,309 square foot vacant single- family residential parcel at 2468 Fifth Avenue and the 20,321 square foot developed single-family residential property at 2452 Fifth Avenue, resulting in a 33,031 square foot vacant lot and 21,499 square foot developed lot, respectively. The adjustment would increase the overall width of the vacant lot by approximately 10-feet. This enhances the building footprint possible for the two frontage lots and helps provide the Fire Department 20-foot paved access requirement for the flag lot. All three lots would exceed the minimum 50-lot width standard of the R5 district . The transfer of land along the easterly creek bank to the developed lot is appropriate given that this area would be inaccessible to proposed flag Lot 3, and is more suited as rear yard area for this property. (Note : The developed property receiving this land maintains two assessor parcel numbers, as a result of an historic property boundary adjustment , but is in fact a single residential parcel). Subdivision (S14-001): Request to subdivide the resulting (post adjustment) 33 ,031 square foot vacant lot into three residential parcels including a large flag lot, all meeting the minimum 50 foot lot width and 5 ,000 square foot parcel size and anticipated density of the area, as follows: New Lot 1: 7,979 sq. ft. area, 58 foot width New .Lot 2: 6,895 sq. ft. area, 53 foot width New Lot 3: 18,157 sq. ft. area', 110 foot width , The access stem would typically be excluded from the required lot area. In this case, the lot substantially exceeds the minimum required area. The subdivision includes review of the flag lot design and the proposed creek setbacks ; which are 10- feet for the flag lot and 20 feet for the frontage lots , with walkway encroachments into the setback required to provide access around homes . These setbacks are proposed to accommodate a conventional home footprint. There are no formal exceptions to zoning or subdivision regulations being requested. The project would require that specific additional findings be made to approve , a) the lot design , and b) the requested creek setback. The creek setback has been deemed to be necessary by staff in order to provide suitable building pads for development of each lot in a manner that would be consistent with the design intent and character for R5 district lots. Without the proposed and staff recommended encroachments into the creek setback, including fill of the unusual "draw" feature within the flag lot, the buildable lot area would be constrained in a manner that would result in especially small, or tall and narrow two-story home. No additional permits are required from other permitting agencies outside of the City ; such as US Army Corps and State Department Fish and Wildlife , which have jurisdiction over any activities within a designated waterway and riparian creek , given that the project would not encroach on the streambed or creek bank . Encroachment , Grading and Building Permits would be required for construction of the lots. Environmental and Design Review permits would also be required for design of any new home on the flag lot, and for any new two story home with an upper story over 500 square feet. Conceptual building footprints have been provided to demonstrate that the proposed lots could be built to comply with minimum zoning and construction requirements without requiring variances or exceptions . REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION -Case No: S14-001/LLA14-002 PageS ANALYSIS San Rafael General Plan 2020 Consistency: The project has been determined to be consistent with all of the pertinent applicable General Plan 2020 Goals and Policies, as follows: • The project satisfies the Land Use Element, Residential Low Density General Plan land use designation, and Housing Element by providing anticipated residential development within the density range of 2 to 6.5 units per gross acre. • The project promotes the Neighborhood Design Element and Community Design by providing adequate sidewalks, street trees and related frontage improvements with a lot pattern that are in keeping with the Sun Valley neighborhood area. • Safety, Water Quality, Conservation and Sustainability Elements are satisfied given that the project achieves the following: o Proposes appropriate drainage improvements, o Will avoid placement of fill or land development activities within the natural Mahon creek tributary, o Proposes a creek setback of 25 feet for the two standard lots and 10 feet for the flag lot to proposed structures, which has been reviewed by a wildlife biologist and staff, and is recommended as adequate for that location given the characteristics of the property, o Included review by State Department of Fish and Wildlife and determination by US Army Corp of Engineers to assure development would not impact waterways or riparian habitat, o Included geotechnical review of the site and proposed fill areas to assure that the site is suitable and capable of supporting the intended development intensity, and o Provided a Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy Checklist confirming the project will comply with the City of San Rafael Climate Change Action Plan and Regional Air District Air Quality Plan. Specifically, the project would be required to comply with the Green Building Ordinance, Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, Wood-Burning Appliance Ordinance, Construction Demolition and Debris Recycling Ordinance and Affordable Housing ordinance requirements that apply to residential development. The project would also provide tree planting and sidewalk pedestrian improvements. Zoning Ordinance Consistency: The project has been reviewed for compliance with all of the applicable zoning standards of the San Rafael Municipal Code (which implement General Plan 2020 programs and land use map) as follows: Chapter 14.04 -Residential Land Use Regulations The R5 residential development densities are intended to be based on existing development patterns in the area and environmental site constraints. The density is considered adequate for the following reason: • The project exceeds the minimum intended base density of two units per acre and falls within the mid-range of 6 units (which could be permitted based on a 5,000 square foot minimum required lot size). • The three-unit density is appropriate for the relatively level and non-hillside site considering that a significant portion (almost one-half of the site area) is encumbered by a drainage channel, Mahon Creek tributary and adjacent low lying riparian habitat. The R5 property development standards would be satisfied given the following: • Each lot is over 5,000 square feet in area and 50 feet in width. • A suitable building pad can be provided that would accommodate a reasonable sized single- family residence. REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION -Case No: S14-001/LLA14-002 PageS Based on this review, the project would not be in conflict with any of the R5 base district residential standards. . Chapter 14.03 -Wetland Overlay District Pursuant to Section 14.13.040.B, setbacks for creeks and drainage way shall be established consistent with Section 14.16.080 (Creeks and other watercourses). Therefore, this project has been subject to review under Chapter 14.16 and is not subject to any special Wetland Overlay district provisions. The site has been previously graded and developed and the current and proposed site characteristics would remain substalJtially the same. Development of the site with additional single-family homes in compliance with the R5 district would not result in alteration or fill of wetlands through grading or significant site alterations. The site is not considered to be subject to any additional restrictions or requirements established under this Chapter. Chapter 14.16 -Site and Use Regulations The site and use regulations are intended to ensure that new uses and development will contribute to and be harmonious with existing development, reduce hazards to the public resulting from inappropriate location, use or design of buildings and other improvements, and be consistent with the policies of the General Plan 2020. Review and discussion of the standards found to be applicable is provided below. • Accessory Structures (14.16.020) The proposed residential lots have been designed with buildable land area, including side and rear yard areas that could accommodate new homes and could allow for placement of some typical residential accessory structures, while respecting the site constraints. No issues or concerns regarding compliance with this section have been identified with the project, as currently proposed. If reduced creek setbacks and incidental grading of Lot 3 are not supported, staff has determined that the resulting lot would have a very narrow building area which could not accommodate a conventional building footprint. Exceptions or variances would likely be necessary to develop the flag lot, if allowed without the modifications and creek setbacks proposed. • Affordable Housing Requirement (14.16.030) Any new for sale residential development project must provide affordable housing units. This requirement would not apply to a project of four or fewer units that would be less than 1,800 square feet. In this case, the lot size and shape would accommodate homes of at least 1,800 square feet (based on a 40% building lot coverage plus the permissible upper story size limit). Therefore, the project is subject to a 10% affordable housing requirement, or 0.3 affordable units. Payment of an in-lieu fee for a fractional unit below 0.5 units can be proposed to satisfy this requirement. The current impact fee has been established at $254,599 for 1 affordable residential unit. The following is recommended as a condition of approval to comply with this section: ./ Payment of an in-lieu fee in the amount of $76,380 (i.e., $254,599 * 0.3 units) shall be submitted prior to recordation of the Parcel Map, or issuance of building or grading permits for the project, whichever first occurs. • Creeks and other watercburses (14.16.080) Creek setbacks of twenty-five foot (25') or greater are recommended for development on small lots, between a structure and the high top of creek bank. The setbacks for a drainage-way are determined at the time of project review, based on the setback criteria of this section. Pedestrian and bicycle access is also encouraged along creek and drainage way corridors where feasible. Lastly, fill in a creek or drainage way would be subject to a use permit and compliance with Chapter 14.13. REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION .. Case No: S14-001/LLA14-002 Page 7 The project does not propose any fill in a wetland, and does not maintain a feasible opportunity for providing public access to the creek. The creek tributary exits an enclosed drainage system that parallels Fifth Avenue just east of the site, which provides existing public access opportunities. Enhancement and preservation of the creek channel is still desirable, and encouraged by the City General Plan and zoning code. Thus, in this case the proposed creek and drainage setbacks have been determined using the following setback criteria of this sect,ion: 1. The setback provides for adequate maintenance, emergency vehicle access, adequate debris flow avalanche corridors, flood control and protection from damage due to stream bank undercutting; 2. The setback adequately protects and preserves native riparian and wildlife habitat; 3. The setback protects major view corridors and provides for recreation opportunities where appropriate; 4. The setback permits provision of adequate and attractive natural landscaping. Consistent with the creek and drainage way requirements, City staff has previously recommended that the existing drainage outlet on proposed Lot 3 would not require additional setbacks, given this has been created and established as a man-made drainage improvement. Regarding the creek channel, the applicant has had their geotechnical and civil engineers, and a 'biologist (WRA), evaluate the site conditions and proposed setbacks. WRA provided evaluations of the creek on February 10, 2014, June 18, 2014 and June 15, 2015 (Exhibit 3). The most recent letter of June 15, 2015 summarizes the environmental and biological conditions found on the site as it relates to the current proposal, and includes descriptions of the creek setbacks in accordance with the General Plan 2020 and the US Army Corps jurisdictional determination map. This updated letter confirms that the proposed setbacks and fill of the northerly draw located on Lot 3 would notimpact US waterways or riparian habitat. As noted in the Site DeSCription and the Background section discussions above, State Department of Fish and Wildlife has confirmed that the project does not require approval for streambed alteration; i.e., would not encroach into creek habitat or waterways. Furthermore, the geotechnical and drainage reports have been reviewed and confirmed as adequate by Public Works and Planning staff, and do not identify any unusual site grading, soils or drainage conditions associated with the site.1 The applicant's consultants have recommended, and staff agrees, that the setbacks suggested for this project would adequately satisfy the creek setback criteria for the following reasons: )-Criteria 1 ("The setback provides for adequate maintenance, emergency vehicle access, adequate debris flow avalanche corridors, flood control and protection from damage due to stream bank undercutting'? would be satisfied because: o There would be adequate access to the creek channel from the side and rear yards of the proposed frontage lots from the access stem of the flag lot. o Vehicle turnaround area is proposed to be provided on Lot 3 (flag lot), which could be used by emergency and maintenance vehicles if necessary to access the residence, creek and drainage channels from this location. o There is no risk of creek bank undercutting, or need for debris flow avalanche corridors given that the creek carries a low volume and rate of runoff from the adjacent watershed and maintains a shallow gradient. o As noted in the drainage analysis, the flow in the creek is only 1 to 3 feet deep during a 100 year storm event. On lot 3, this depth would be 0.8 to 1 feet while the creek channel 1 All documents referenced in this report can be found in the project file. REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION .. Case No: S14-001/LLA14-,002 PageS has a 7 to 8 foot depth which provides a great deal of freeboard as well as significant vertical and horizontal separation from the water flow line. o The drainage outfall has been clearly established as a man-made feature that should be preserved but that would not warrant any further setback protections. o There is no evidence that stream bank undercutting within the property is expected since the channel slope does not produce erosive velocities. » Criteria 2 (" The setback adequately protects and preserves native riparian and wildlife habitat') would be satisfied because: o No significant native riparian or wildlife habitat has been identified within the area beyond the top of creek bank. o The CA Fish and Wildlife have been consulted and confirmed the determinations made by WRA. o Staff has conducted its own site visit and is satisfied that these conclusions are accurate. » Criteria 3 (liThe setback protects major view corridors and provides for recreation opportunities where appropriate') would be satisfied because: o There is no significant view corridor to protect in this area. o The area is not identified nor considered appropriate for recreation opportunities given its location in an established residential neighborhood and topographic conditions which are suited for the residential development anticipated for the site. » Criteria 4 (" The setback permits provision of adequate and attractive natural landscaping") would be satisfied because: o The project would maintain approximately 4,470 square feet of area within the proposed creek setback for the Flag Lot alone. o The creek setback areas proposed for all three lots would preserve. the wide creek channel and native vegetation, with adequate buffer for landscaping, yard and walkways along and within the buffer, and redUCing pressures for encroachment of development into the setback area. o The design of lots would accommodate a conventional building. footprint of 40 feet, which is considered to be sufficient for a conventional home and garage footprint in the R5 district. . o The creek setback and buffer areas, limitations of use, and maintenance requirement would be reflected within the deeds of each of the lots. o The lot sizes accommodate the native creek channel and would serve to protect the creek corridor in its natural state during and post construction. The following are recommended conditions of approval to assure ongoing with this section: ../ A building setback line shall be recorded with the final parcel map, as indicated on the tentative parcel map, consisting of a 25 foot building setback from creek bank on Lot 1 and Lot 2 and minimum 10 foot setback from creek bank on Lot 3 (Flag Lot) ../ All land area between the building setback line and top of creek bank shall be designated as a natural landscape area. The natural landscape area shall be designated as restricted to planting of native and compatible landscaping, pathways and walkways. No permanent structures or permanent improvements shall be permitted in this area . ../ The open drainage outfall crossing all three lots shall be designates as restricted to m.aintenance of the drainage way, with no alteration permitted without prior review and approval by the Department of Public Works. REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION -Case No: S14-001/LLA14-002 Page 9 ./ Property restrictions shall specify that no improvements or modifications shall be permitted to occur within the creek and jurisdictional boundary, as it is shown on the tentative parcel map. Staff supports the proposed lot design and improvements with these conditions. Subdivision Ordinance Consistency: Chapter 15.05 Lot Line Adjustments The project proposes a concurrent property line adjustment that must be recorded prior to the recordation of a final parcel map for the project. The map act establishes that a local agency shall limit its determination on a lot line adjustment to review for compliance with the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance and Building Codes. Based on the limited discretion applicable to review of lot line adjustments, the request should be approved if found to comply with the applicable zoning and building code regulations. In this case, the resulting adjusted parcels both continue to exceed the R5 minimum area and width standards, and would not create any nonconforming setbacks to existing structures. A minimum 5 foot side yard setback is shown as maintained for existing structures on 2452 Fifth Avenue; as shown on Plan Sheet C1. Therefore, staff supports the lot line adjustment. Chapter 15.03 Minor Subdivisions The project requires a parcel map for minor subdivision, which typically would be acted on by the Community Development Director. Minor subdivision approval on a non-hillside parcel would routinely be reviewed and approved if it complies with the underlying zoning district and subdivision standards. In this case, staff had identified concerns with the proposed lot pattern and creek setback particularly with Lot 3 (Flag Lot). After conducting additional research of the creek area, which included a geotechnical review of the property and surrounding area and biological review of the creek, the applicant proposed a revised configuration for Lot 3 that would allow for development of a more conventional house plan. This was accomplished by proposing to fill a minor "swale" feature that would increase the width of the development area on Lot 3. Staff is generally supportive of this concept. The final subdivision plan shows that Lot 1 and Lot 2 could accommodate homes built up to the 25-foot creek setback established by the Zoning Code (Section 14.16.080, discussed above). Further, flag Lot 3 can accommodate a conventional footprint with the proposed fill and a creek setback of 10 feet rather than the recommended 25 feet. Therefore, the plan has been referred to the Planning Commission to review and approve the modifications proposed to the creek setback; which are considered appropriate to accommodate a conventional building footprint and home size on this lot. The proposed creek setbacks are recommended by staff as reasonable, logical and responsive to site conditions. • Findings required Pursuant to Section 15.02.080, approval or denial of a minor subdivision map must be supported by findings, which must conclude that the project is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Code, is physically suited for the density, would not cause substantial damage to the environment or wildlife, or cause serious health problem, and would not conflict with public easements. If approved, a final parcel map would need to be filed and approved by the City Engineer to create the lots and ensure all required improvements would be installed as required and conditioned. Staff has prepared draft findings for approval in Exhibit 2 (Draft Resolution of Approval). • Subdivision Standards Staff has identified the primary issue as whether the density of lots, as proposed, would not adversely impact the creek. Staff recommends that findings can be made to support the project given that the lots are capable of being improved to accommodate reasonable R5 development, without altering the natural REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION ~ Case No: S14-001/LLA14.-002 Page 10 creek channel and habitat, or site drainage or grading characteristics. The project also appears to satisfy the applicable subdivision standards of Chapter 15.06 through 15.11, as follows: ~ Utilities and Under grounding of Utilities. The project is located on an improved residential street with sewer, water, power telephone and cable available. Undergrounding of overhead lines would be required and is proposed for the project. The project would not require any facility upgrades or off-site work to extend utility infrastructure to the site. ~ Roadway, Sidewalks, Street Lighting and Street Trees. The project would generate 2 AM and 2 PM additional trips per residence. No additional traffic improvements are required along Fifth Avenue or any intersections affected from the additional small volume of traffic that would result form buildout of this vacant site with three (3) homes. Mitigation fees would be required to pay for all street and roadway improvements identified in the General Plan 2020 for anticipated buildout of the community in compliance with the General Plan land use plan. The project is required to provide a sidewalk with new curb and gutter to comply with urban street standards. Sidewalk and street tree improvements are proposed consistent with the existing neighborhood. The project does show removal of a large tree on the property to accommodate the house and drainage improvements on new Lot 1. The developer is proposing to build the homes in the locations shown. The City does not have a tree protection or replacement requirement outside of hillside areas. ~ Grading, drainage, watercourse, creeks and wetland protections. Drainage improvements are required and proposed to handle additional runoff, which would be collected and released into the creek in a manner that would not alter the current amount and velocity of runoff occurring from the site. Public works has reviewed the engineering solutions which include engineered dissipaters at outfalls to slow and moderate the release of runoff back into the creek, and'bio- swales to further mitigate contaminants before entering the drainage system. These systems comply with City standards for handling new hardscape runoff before release into the existing natural drainage way. ~ Lots and Lot Access and Fire Protection measures. The parcels all have adequate street frontage and do not require new roadways. A 20 foot paved driveway access is required for the flag lot, with turnaround space provided, to comply with Fire Department requirements. ~ Park Dedication and In Lieu Fees. Payment of parkland dedication in lieu fees would be required to address the impacts of development. General Plan 2020 Exhibit 25 shows that the City has adequate public parklands for total build-out under the City General Plan 2020; with the greatest need being enhancement of existing facilities. The project would generate demand for 0.0025 acres of parkland based upon 2.5 persons per unit divided by 3 units,' times 3-acres of parkland required per 1,000 population. In this case, a fee may be imposed in conjunction with new residential subdivisions, pursuant to Chapter 15.09 of the City's Subdivision Ordinance. The fees collected are used for acquisition and improvement of parkland for the additional population generated by the new development. These fees are collected as part of building permit or recordation of final map, whichever occurs first. The fee is calculated based on the Number of Dwelling Units for purchase only x $1,967.98. Payment of the in lieu fee is recommended as appropriate in this case, as the site would not be suitable for nor recommended for creation of additional parklands. Staff's only outstanding concern remains with the pavement width required to access the flag lot. Staff would support further investigation and direction on feasible options to provide alternative hardscape treatments along the driveway that would reduce the visual impact of paving and still meet the fire code REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION -Case No: S14-001/LLA14-002 Page 11 access requirement. The following conditions of approval are recommended to assure compliance with City standards prior to development of the site: ./ Within two (2) years after approval or conditional approval of a tentative map for a minor subdivision, the subdivider shall cause the subdivision to be surveyed and a parcel map to be prepared by a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor, in conformance with the approved tentative map. An application for and the original parcel map shall be filed with the city engineer with the requirements specified by the Subdivision Ordinance . ./ Recordation of the Lot Line Adjustment request shall occur prior to recordation of the final parcel map . ./ Payment of Traffic Mitigation Fee in the amount of $50,952 in total, or $16,984 per new single family residence required prior to issuance of a building permit (Le., 12 net new AM and PM trips, based on 2 new AM and 2 new PM trips per residential lot times $4,246 per net new peak hour trip) . ./ Payment of Parkland Dedication Fee in the amount of.$5,903.94 (Le., three dwelling units for purchase times $1,967.98 fee amount) prior to recordation of the Final Parcel Map . ./ Payment of the required Housing in lieu fee in the amount of $76,380 (Le., $254,599 • 0.3 units) prior to recordation of the Final Parcel Map, or prior to any issuance of building or grading permits for the project, whichever first occurs . ./ No new utility poles shall be installed for the project, and utility connections shall be extended underground to serve the new lots . ./ Improvement plans shall be submitted along with the final Parcel Map plans for review and approval by the Community Development Department and Public Works prior to construction. This shall include but not be limited to review of final tree species, placement and planting details, sidewalk and drainage improvements . ./ The final map shall include those specific restrictions required for the creek setback, natural landscape area and jurisdictional creek area, as required herein . ./ Compliance with the requirements of the Fire Department, Marin Municipal Water District, San Rafael Sanitation District, and other utility and service agencies shall be documented on improvement plans and at time of building permit. ./ The applicant shall provide a driveway detail that includes alternative hardscape treatments to reduce the overall visual impacts of the 20-foot wide driveway paving required by the Fire Department for the flag lot. An increase of the access stem should be accommodated, if feasible, to allow for landscaping along the exterior side of the access driveway. Staff supports approval of the subdivision map with conditions addressing these items. INTER-DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW The project has been reviewed by the Building Division, Public Works Department, Fire Department, San Rafael Sanitation District and Marin Municipal Water District which would serve the site and review REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION -Case No: S14-001/LLA14-002 Page 12 permits for development of the individual lots. The current plans include several changes that have been made to demonstrate that requirements of all agencies can be met without further altering the proposed development plan. Conditions of approval are recommended and included in the draft project approval resolution to guide the applicant in preparation of final map, improvement plans and construction drawings. In addition, each residence would be subject to payment of school impact fees prior to issuance of building permits, which is required by the district to fund maintenance or expansion of facilities to keep up with anticipated population increases in the community. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD RECOMMENDATION The proposed R5 subdivision does not require review by the Design Review Board (DRB) because it is not in a Planned Development or Hillside District. An Administrative Design Review permit would be required prior to construction of a home on the flag lot. A Zoning Administrator level Design Review hearing would be required for construction of a residence on any of the lots that proposed a second floor level greater than 500 square feet. If it is deemed necessary or requested by residents, the DRB could be asked to review designs of homes subject to design review. Design review of a single-story home is not required for the standard lots. The applicant intends to construct the homes shown conceptually on the project plans. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION A lot line adjustment and three lot residential subdivision on an infill, non-hillside property qualifies as exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to Section 15303(a) construction of up to three single family residences, Section 15304 (minor grading on land with slopes of less than 10-percent and not in a waterway or wetland), 15305 (minor lot line adjustments on lots with slope of less than 20-percent), and 15315 (minor land divisions of four or fewer lots in urbanized areas zoned for residential). There have been no special or unique circumstances identified on the property, that would preclude applicability of these exemptions to the project, as currently proposed. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING I CORRESPONDENCE A neighborhood meeting was not conducted nor required pursuant to City policy. Notice of the public hearing was provided in accordance with noticing requirements contained in Chapter 29 of the Zoning Ordinance, which included mailing to all property owners and occupants within a 300-foot radius of the subject site and all other interested parties and posting on the subject site 15 calendar days prior to the date of this hearing (Exhibit 4). Copies of correspondence are attached as Exhibit 5. In summary, public comments received by phone and written express concern with increased traffic and existing roadway speeds, adequacy of parking, two-story development on the lots, and protection of the creek. OPTIONS The Planning Commission has the following options: 1. Approve the applications as presented (staff recommendation) 2. Approve 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. Deny the project and direct staff to return with a revised resolution. REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION. -Case No: S14-001/LLA14-002 Page 13 1. Vicinity Map 2. Draft Resolution of Approval 3. WRA Environmental Consultant Letter, dated June 15, 2015 4. PC Meeting Notice 5. Public Correspondence Plans have been distributed to the Planning Commission only Exhibit 2 RESOLUTION NO. 15- RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING A LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT (LLAI4-002) AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP (SI4-001) FOR tHREE RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2468 FIFTH AVENUE APN: 010-351-18 WHEREAS, on October 30, 2014, Raymond Cassidy submitted application(s) for the following: 1) A minor adjustment in the property boundary between the 0.8 acre vacant residential parcel at 2468 Fifth Avenue and the developed residential property at 2452 Fifth Avenue (aka, APN 010-351-17& -19) that wOQld result in a net 1,167 square foot increase in the size of 2452 Fifth Avenue, and 2) to subdivide the resulting 33,031 square foot property at 2468 Fifth Avenue into 3 residential lots, including one flag lot, with a reduced setback from a creek, located within the R5 Zone District; and WHEREAS, on August 26,2015, all of the application submittal requirements were satisfied, and the Community Development Director referred the matter to the Planning Commission for decision; and WHEREAS, upon review of the project application, the project has been determined not to have a significant impact on the environment as it qualifies for an exemption from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303(a) that applies to construction of three single-family residences, Section 15304 that applies to minor grading on lands with slopes ofless than 10-percent, and Section 15305 that applies to minor lot line adjustments on properties with slopes of less than 20-percent, and Section 15315 that applies to minor subdivisions of four or fewer lots in urbanized areas, and the exemptions are not subject to the Exceptions of Section 15300.2 in that the proposed development area would not be in a paticularly sensitive environment as it avoids impacts to existing creeks and wetlands near the . site; and WHEREAS, on September 29,2015, the San Rafael Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the project, accepting all oral and written public testimony and the written report of the Community Development Department staff. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the Planning Commission makes the following findings: Findings (LLAl4-002) Lot Line Adjustment A. The proposed adjustment to the boundary line between the existing 34,209 square foot vacant residential parcel at 2468 Fifth Avenue project and the developed 20,321 square foot developed residential parcel at 2452 Fifth Avenue complies with State Gov. Code 66412 and San Rafael Municipal Code Chapter 15.05 in that: i) The lot line adjustment involves fewer than four parcels. Exhibit 2 -PC Resolution 2468 Fifth Ave Lot Split ii) The lot line adjustment would not change the existing single-family residential land use of the property, which will remain and is consistent with the General Plan 2020 low density residential land use designation. iii) The resulting parcels after net transfer of 1,167 square feet of land from the larger vacant parcel to the developed residential parcel would remain compliant with the R5 zoning standards that establish a minimum 50 foot lot width, 5,000 square foot lot size and minimum 5 foot side yard building setback which would be maintained to all structures on the existing developed property at 2452 Fifth Avenue. iv) The adjustment would not eliminate any existing required parking and access to the existing developed property at 2452 Fifth Avenue. v) The resulting parcels would not create conflicts with the building code in that minimum five-foot setbacks are proposed to be maintained and provided to existing structures on the developed properties. vi) Notice of the lot line adjustment has been provided to adjacent neighbors and posted -on-site at least 15 days prior to the hearing, in compliance with Chapter 14.29 noticihg requirements. B. The Planning Commission has exercised its independent judgement and determined that the lot line would not to have a significant impact on the environment as it qualifies for an exemption from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15305 that applies to minor lot line adjustments on properties with slopes ofless than 20-percent. Findings (S14-001) Tentative Parcel Map A. The project design is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the Subdivision Ordinance based on the following: i) The project is in accord with the General Plan in that the proposal has been determined to be consistent with all of the applicable General Plan goals and policies for the following reasons: a. The project falls within the allowable General Plan 2020 Low Density Residential density range of2 to 6.5 units per gross acre, in that the net property size of 33,031 square feet would allow up to six units on the site, and the project proposes more than the minimum 2 lots anticipated to meet the minimum land use density range. b.The project promotes the Neighborhood Element and Community Design Element residential goals through provision of new sidewalks, street trees and undergrounding of utilities with a lot pattern that is consistent with the residential character ofthe Sun Valley neighborhood area. c. The project includes appropriate drainage improvements that would comply with City standards enforced by Public Works, that Water Quality goals and policies of the General Plan 2020. d.The project has provided biologist and soils evaluations required to confirm that it would avoid disturbance of habitat and creeks in the vicinity and that -2- the site is suitable for the density of development proposed, which addresses goals and policies of the Safety and Conservation Elements. e. The project would comply with all required ordinances that apply to residential development which have been established to implement the City of San Rafael's General Plan 2020 Sustainability Element as well as the April 2009 Climate Change Action. Specifically, the applicant has provided a Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy Checklist confirming the project will comply with the City of San Rafael Climate Change Action Plan and Regional Air District Air Quality Plan through compliance with the Green Building Ordinance, Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, Wood-Burning Appliance Ordinance, Construction Demolition and Debris Recycling Ordinance and Affordable Housing ordinance requirements that apply to residential development. The project would also provide tree planting and sidewalk pedestrian improvements. ii) The project is in accord with the Zoning Ordinance in that all applicable requirements of the R5 zoning district would be satisfied for the following reasons: a. The development is consistent with the purpose and intent of the R5 low density residential district in that it would provide opportunities for low- density, detached single-family residential development at densities that are consistent with the existing development patterns in the area and the environmental site constraints. b. The project complies with the R5 reside~tial zoning standards of Chapter 14.04 and the proposed lots would provide a minimum 50 foot lot width and 5,000 square foot lot size as required by the Zoning District, including the flag lot with the access stem not included. c.Building areas have been established for each of the proposed lots that would accommodate a building with a footprint which would be in keeping with a conventional R5 lot with respect to size and width. iii) The project is in aycord with all other applicable provisions of the Zoning Otdinance for the following reasons: a. While accessory structures are not required, the properties provide yard areas that could accommodate placement of some minor accessory structures adhering to creek setback constraints. b.Deed restrictions are proposed to be imposed as a condition of approval to assure that the applicant and future homeowners would be made aware of the City of San Rafael creek setback limitations and restrictions. c. The project would be required to pay an affordable housing fee in the amount of $76,380 for 0.3 units, as required by the zoning ordinance, as a condition of the subdivision map. d.The project has been reviewed by qualified experts and confirmed by City staff to allow for creek setbacks of less than 25 feet for improvements on the 2 standard lots and 10 feet for buildings on the flag lot. The criteria for reduced setback have been addressed as follows: 1. The setback provides for adequate maintenance, emergency vehicle access, debris flow, adequate flood control and protection from damage due to creek undercutting because the site provides access to the creek from the stem of the flag lot, with a 20 foot driveway and - 3 - vehicle turnaround area provided on this lot, and the low velocity and water volume in the creek as well as the amount of free board provided would not pose any of the aforementioned risks. 2. The setback adequately protects and preserves riparian and wildlife habitat because the reports by WRA, summarized in its recent June 15, 2015 letter, confirm that the proposed developable areas are located completely outside of jurisdictional waterways and riparian areas of the property. 3. There are no significant view corridors across this property, and no opportunities for recreational access to the creek in this location, which is best left preserved and protected in its natural state with the property restrictions proposed on use of the natural setback area and creek. 4. The setback would provide for adequate and attractive natural landscaping to be provided and maintained post-development of this previously developed lot. 5. Notice of the subdivision request has been provided to neighbors within 300 feet and posted on-site at least 15 days prior to the hearing, in compliance with Chapter 14.29 noticing requirements. iv) The findings required for approval of the subdivision have been included in Finding E, below. . B. The project design is consistent with all applicable site, architecture and landscaping design criteria and guidelines for the district in which the site is located given that the site development complies with the R5 District zoning and development standards and purposes of the district as specifically noted in A.b. above. C. As conditioned, the project design minimizes adverse environmental impacts,by limiting grading to the building footprint and driveway and preserving existing vegetation in the proposed natural landscape creek setback area to the maximum extent feasible, as further described in fmding A.c.II. & .IV. above. 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 by the appropriate agencies and conditioned accordingly, with conditions imposed by the Department of Public Works to ensure drainage systems comply with City standards to treat runoff, and regulate additional runoff, and the 20-foot wide access to flag Lot 3 that meets Fire Department access requirements. E. The Subdivision findings of Chapter 15.02 and applicable requirements of Chapters 15.03, 15.06 through 15.11 are satisfied in that: i) The project is in accord with the General Plan 2020 and Zoning Code as noted in Findings A and B above. ii) The site is physically suited for the density and would not cause substantial damage to the environment, or wildlife, or cause any serious health problems, nor conflict with any easments (as shown on the subdivison map and confilmed by Staff's review of the property title report), as noted in Findings A, B, C and D above. -4- iii) Utilities are readily available at the property and new power, cable and telephone connections are proposed to be extended to the site underground. iv) The project includes required frontage improvements including new sidewalks, lighting and street trees consistent with City standards and requirements. v) Grading, drainage, creek and wetland protection requirements have been addressed through plan revisions, and as conditions of approval which will include a review of final improvement plans that would provide the necessary details to implement the project as shown. vi) All lots have adequate street frontage and meet fire department requirements for access, including the flag lot which would provide a 20 foot wide driveway to the residence. vii) Parkland dedication requirements to address the impact of the additional.0025 acre demand on parklands would be satisfied through payment of parkland dedication in lieu fees in the amount of$I,967.98 per new lot ($5,903.94 total), in accordance with the City fee schedule. viii) Traffic impacts of the project would be addressed through payment of the mitigation fee of$16,984.00 for each of the three new residential units ($50,952 total) in accordance with the City fee schedule, which has been established to fund traffic improvement identified for buildout under the General Plan 2020 land use scenario. ix) The San Rafael Sanitation District and Marin Municipal Water District have reviewed the plans, provided standard conditions and confirmed that water and sewer connections are available in the street and can accommodate the three new units without requiring service upgrades. F. The Planning Commission has exercised its independent judgment and determined that the Class 3 categorical exemptions for the project pursuant to Section 15303(a) that applies to construction of three single-family residences, Section 15304 that applies to minor grading on lands with slopes ofless than lO-percent, Section 15305 that applies to minor lot line adjustments on properties with slopes of less than 20-percent, and Section 15315 that applies to minor subdivisions of four or fewer lots in urbanized areas, are appropriate and consistent with the provisions of CEQA in that the project involves construction of three single-family residences on a residentially zoned infill, non-hillside parcel. Furthermore, the project is not precluded from use of the exemptions based on any of the reasons cited for Exceptions pursuant to Section 15300.2 of the CEQA guidelines, in that the proposed development area would not be in a paticularly sensitive environment as it avoids impacts to existing creeks and wetlands near the site. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the City of San Rafael approves the Lot Line Adjustment and Tentative Parcel Map subject to the following conditions: Conditions of Approval (LLAl4-002) Lot Line Adjustm~nt 1. This approval of minor parcel adjustment between 2468 Fifth Avenue and 2452 Fifth Avenue, as shown on approved plans, shall be valid for two years from approval or until September 29,2017, and shall be null and void if a final parcel is not submitted or a time extension granted prior to the expiration date. - 5 - 2. Three copies of the Final Plat maps, deeds and closure documents shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval by Planning and Public Works, prior to recordation. 3. The Lot Line Adjustment shall be recorded prior to recordation of a Final Parcel Map for 2468 Fifth Avenue. Conditions of Approval (S14-001) Tentative Pareel Map Community Development Department, Planning Division 1. This approval be valid for two years from approval or until September 29,2017, and shall be null and void if a final parcel is not submitted or a time extension granted prior to the expiration date. 2. Recordation of the Lot Line Adjustment request LLA14-002 shall occur prior to recordation of the final parcel map. 3. Within two (2) years after approval of the conditional tentative map for minor subdivision, the subdivider shall cause the subdivision to be surveyed and a parcel map to be prepared by a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor, in conformance with the approved tentative map. 4. An application for final parcel map shall be filed with the city engineer with the requirements specified by the Subdivision Ordinance (Title 15), along with detailed improvement plans that address the requirements of Title 15 and include the following: a. Submit an engineer's estimate for the improvements proposed for this site. A subdivision improvement agreement may be required for this work which shall be addressed at time of final parcel map approval. b. Sidewalk, curb and gutter shall be provided and show details on improvement plans that shall adhere to Federal ADA requirements. c. Provide planting details and type and size of trees for review and approval by Public Works and Planning. d. Landscaping details shall be subject to review and approval to assure compliance with site distance at driveways and to evaluate project to assure landscaping in vicinity wetland and watercourse would be proposed in a manner to prevent bank eroslOn. e. Review of final improvement plans and details shall include but not be limited to review of final tree species, placement and planting details, sidewalk and drainage improvements. -6- f. The final map shall include those specific restrictions required for the creek setback, natural landscape area and jurisdictional creek area, as required herein. g. Include the Best Management Practices plan sheet in improvement plan and construction drawings. 5. An encroachment permit must be obtained for work within the right of way. 6. Compliance With the requirements of the Fire Department, Marin Municipal Water District, San Rafael Sanitation District, and other utility and service agencies shall be documented on improvement plans and at time of building permit. 7. A 20-foot paved driveway access and turnaround area shall be provided for the flag lot parcel, Lot 3, as indicated on the tentative parcel map. However, prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall provide a driveway detail for review and approval by the Planning Division and Fire Department that shows whether alternative hardscape treatments are feasible to reduce the overall visual impacts of the 20-foot wide driveway paving required by the Fire Department for the flag lot. An increase of the access stem should also be accommodated, if feasible, to allow for landscaping along the exterior side of the access driveway. 8. Improvement plans for new sewer facilities shall be submitted to SRSD for review and approval and shall adhere to SRSD Standard Specifications. The following comments shall be addressed: a. Sewer lateral connections to existing sewer main shall be accomplished by connecting a Wye or T branches. b. Sewer laterals shall not have bends in the public right of way but gentle sweeps when a change in direction cannot be avoided c. Add cleanouts where the sewer lateral line bends or changes direction at the private property. d. Provide the type of pipe and slopes complying with the SRSD Standards. e. Sewer laterals shall have a minimum of 5' separation. f. Add backflow prevention device at building for each lateral. 9. Add the following construction notes on the Utility Plan (sheet C4): Notify the SRSD inspector 48 hours prior to start of construction at (415) 485-3194. 10. The applicant shall apply to the Community Development Department, Building Division, for addresses after the fmal parcel map is recorded and prior to submittal for building permits. Tentative addresses are; Lot 1 -2464, Lot 2 -2466, and Lot 3 -2468. 11. All Construction activities shall comply with the City's Noise Ordinance, Chapter 8.13 of the municipal code. This.includes limitation on construction hours, as follows: CONSTRUCTION HOURS (includes any and all deliveries) Monday -Friday: 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Saturday: 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. -7- SundaylHolidays: Prohibited 12. If, during the course of construction, cultural, archaeological, or paleontological resources are uncovered at the site (surface or subsurface resources) work shall be halted immediately within 50 meters (150 feet) of the find until it can be evaluated by a qualified professional archaeologist. The City of San Rafael Planning Division and a qualified archaeologist (Le., an archaeologist registered with the Society of Professional Archaeologists) shall be immediately contacted by the responsible individual present on- site. When contacted, the project planner and the archaeologist shall imniediately visit the site to determine the extent of the resources and to develop proper mitigation measures required for the discovery. 13. Payment of Traffic Mitigation Fee in the amount of $50,952 in total, or $16,984 per new single family residence, shall be required prior to issuance of a building permit (i.e., for 12 total net new AM and PM trips, based on 2 new AM and 2 new PM trips per residential lot, times $4,246 per net new peak hour trip). 14. Payment of Parkland Dedication Fee consistent with San Rafael Municipal Code Title 15, in the amount of$5,903.94 (Le., three dwelling units for purchase, times $1,967.98 fee amount) shall be required prior to recordation ofthe Final Parcel Map. 15. Payment of Mfordable Housing in lieu fee consistent with San Rafael Municipal Code Section 14.16.030, in the amount of$76,380 (I.e., $254,599, times 0.3 units) shall be required prior to recordation of the Final Parcel Map, or prior to any issuance of building or grading permits for the project, whichever first occurs. 16. Sewer connection fees payable to Central Marin Sanitation District and San Rafael Sanitary District will be required prior to issuance of building permits for residences, which are currently $8,760.30 per single-family residence (i.e., $26,280.90 total). 17. No new utility poles shall be installed for the project, and utility connections shall be extended underground to serve the ,new lots. 18. Each of the bio-swales proposed to serve each lot within the subdivision shall be shown on the fmal improvement plans and contained entirely within each lot for which it serves. 19. The building setback line shown on the tentative parcel map shall be indicated on the final parcel map plans; consisting of a 25 foot building setback from creek bank on Lot 1 . and Lot 2 and minimum 10 foot building setback from creek bank on Lot 3 (Flag Lot). 20. Property restrictions shall be recorded with the final parcel map that specify the following: a. No permanent structures or modifications shall be permitted within the creek banks, wetland and non-wetland waters of the US, or creek channel as shown on the tentative parcel map. Any work or improvements within this area shall be subject to prior review and approval by the City Department of Public Works and the Planning Division. - 8 - b. All land area between the approved building setback line and the established top of creek bank shall be designated as a "natural landscape area". The use and improvement within the natural landscape area shall specify restrictions allowing only planting of native and compatible landscaping, installation of ancillary pathways and excluding permanent structures, except for approved bio-swales, drainage improvements, and 3' to 5' walkways to provide access around the homes. 21. The open drainage pipe and outfall designated as wetland waters of the us on the tentative map, which is located across all of the three lots, shall include restrictions recorded with the final parcel map to allow only maintenance of the drainage way, with no alteration or further improvement of the area permitted without prior review and . approval by the Department of Public Works. 22. Design Review approval shall be obtained for the flag lot, Lot 3, and any two-story residences, in accordance Chapter 14.25 prior to submittal of building permits. Building permits cannot be requested prior to recordation of the final map. The foregoing Resolution was adopted at the regular City of Sa:£! Rafael Planning Commission meeting held on the 29th day of September, 2015. Moved by Commissioner ______ and seconded by Commissioner ______ _ AYES: COMMISSIONERS NOES: COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS SAN RAFAEL PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: __________________ _ BY: __________________ __ Paul A Jensen, Secretary Barrett Schaefer, Chair -9- Raymond Cassidy PO Box 150173 San Rafael , CA 94915 Exhibit 3 wra ENVIRONMENtAL CONSULTANTS June 15, 2015 RE: Application Submittal Completeness & Next Steps (Mer~s/Environmental Review) File: S14-001 & LLA14-002 -2468 Fifth Avenue Residential Lot Split (APN: 010-351-18) Dear Mr. Cassidy , The purpose of this letter is to respond to the Letter of Completeness from the City of San Rafael dated April 7, 2015 requesting 1) additional information establishing setbacks from the stream and 2) whether the project would be subject to regulatory agency permitting requirements, including a California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement (SLA). On May 12 , 2015 a site visit was conducted at 2468 5th Avenue , in the C~ of San Rafae l, Marin County , California ("Property '). Specifically , the location of the adjacent urbanized creek , the top of bank, and adjacent vegetated areas in the area of proposed project were surveyed to determine relevance to the federal and state jurisdiction , specifically as it pertains to a Fish and Game Code section 1602 Lake and Streambed Alteration (LSA) Agreement and to provide input on the adeq uacy of the creek setback. Federal, State, and Local Regulatory Jurisdictions U.S. Army Corps of Engineers The U.S. Army Corps of Eng ineers (Corps) is responsible for regulating the discharge of fill material into waters of the United States under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). The extent of the Corps jurisdiction includes areas below the ordinary high water and ad j acent wetlands. For freshwater non-tidal creeks, Corps jurisdiction extends to the ordinary high water mark. A jurisdictional determination is used to define the extent of Corps jurisdiction. California Deparlment of Fish and Wildlife The California Fish and Game Code section 1602 requires an entity to notify CDFW prior to commencing any activity that may do one or more of the following: • Substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow of any river, stream or lake; • Substantially change or use any material from the bed , channel or bank of any river, stream, or lake; or . • Deposit debris , waste or other materials that could pass into any river, stream or lake . 2169 ·G Eo st Franc isco Blvd ., Son Rafa el. CA 949 01 (415) 454 -8868 lei (41 5) 454 -012 9 fOJ< InlaNhibitoa. -ilfJl.Me~ WRA Letter CDFW has jurisdiction over the bed and bank of streams, rivers and open water of lakes and ponds. Their jurisdiction extends to the top of bank of a stream or river or outer edge of riparian vegetation, whichever is greater. Regional Water Quality Control Board The Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCB) have been delegated responsibility under Section 401 of the CWA for certifying water quality of projects requiring CWA Section 404 approval. The RWQCB also regulates projects that may impact waters of the State under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. RWQCB jurisdiction generally follows that of CDFW. City of San Rafael The City of San Rafael Ordinance 14.16.080 states that creek setbacks shall be determined based on the following setback criteria: 1. The setback provides for adequate maintenance, emergency vehicle access, adequate debris flow avalanche corridors, flood control and protection from damage due to stream bank undercutting; 2. The setback adequately protects and preserves native riparian and wildlife habitat; 3. The setback protects major view corridors and provides for recreation opportunities where appropriate; 4. The setback permits provision of adequate and attractive natural landscaping. Creek setbacks determined by the City are based on the location of the top of bank. Drainageways, as defined in the San Rafael General Plan, are open drainage swales, or localized depressions that lack defined banks where intermittent or ephemeral runoff may concentrate and do not support significant riparian habitat. Setbacks from drainageways are determined through individual development review, taking Into account eXisting habitat functions and resulting values. Project Description The proposed project includes development of three residential buildings on the footprint of a formerly developed and now deconstructed lot. The attached site plans (Oberkamper and Associates, February 19, 2015b) show the development and adjacent areas and features, including the adjacent creek and Its top of bank. As part of the site grading, a small draw in the northern portion of the site, is planned to be filled outside of the creek top of bank and outside of CDFW and Corps jurisdictions. This filled area will be stabilized with coconut fiber erosion control blanketing and replanted with native vegetation to prevent erosion into the creek. Native vegetation species will be composed of low-growing stabilizing species such as California blackberry (Rubus ursinus), California rose (Rosa califomica), elderberry (Sambucus spp.), and snowberry (Symphoricarpos spp.). A silt fence installed between the immediate work area and the creek will provide an additional measure of protection. The proposed project is designed to avoid direct and indirect impacts to the creek and associated riparian areas. As part of the restoration Existing Conditions The Property is surrounded by developed residential parcels, landscaped lands, and a cemetery immediately to the northwest. The entire Property outside the creek have been previously disturbed or developed. Development includes the foundation of a former residence, and a gate and driveway, and historically-graded lands across the Property. A tall fence runs along the majority of the western and northwestern sides of the Property. A line of ornamental trees and shrubs parallels the fence. The remainder of the site outside the creek appears to have been leveled or graded as part of the former use as a tombstone engraver shop at the south side of the Property with a small residence at the north side of the Property, both of which have been demolished. The Property includes three notable features: 1) a reach of an ephemeral creek that is a tributary to San Rafael Creek, 2) a drainageway', and 3) a creekside depression referred to here as the 'northerly draw". Each of these elements is described below. Creek The creek runs north to south through the eastern side of the Property and serves as a major drain for the larger area. The creek has a well-defined top of bank for most portions as indicated by a significant change in slope located roughly 6 feet above the thalweg (I.e., flow line of the creek). The creek originates on the hillslopes in the Marin County Open Space north of the cemetery and travels to the northern border of the cemetery where it becomes a roadside stormwater ditch (I.e., drainageway) which then turns to the south along the cemetery access road. The water flow then drops into a culvert at the northernmost residential property at 43 Shannon Lane, and travels through an underground culvert before surfacing on the south side of that property. The open creek travels south approximately 175 feet before entering the north side of the Property. The creek bypasses most of the cemetery lands. Upstream and downstream of the site, the creek is spanned by residential driveways and runs underground in portions through culverts. Water also flows into the creek from the stormwater culvert outfall in the drainageway described below (Salem Howes Associates Inc. 2015). Vegetation within the creek includes a large component of non-native, invasive, and ornamental plants, including non-native grasses, French broom (Genista monspessulana), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), and milk thistle (Silybum marianum), and native sedge (Cyperus spp.), and a few large willows (Salix spp.) are also located within the creek. All native riparian trees and shrubs are located within the top of bank. I For clarity, only the swale originating at the culvert in the middle of the site will be referred to as the ~'drainageway" . Drainageway A drainageway located in the middle of the Property is a man-made feature that receives stormwater and irrigation runoff from the adjacent cemetery. The drainageway originates at a culvert and runs to the southeast approximately 55 feet into the creek. This drainageway is shown on the site plans (Oberkamper and Associates 2015b). The drainageway receives surface and irrigation runoff from a 36-inch concrete culvert that is connected to a storm drain system on the adjacent cemetery lands to the northwest. This stormwater drain system and culvert collect irrigation and stormwater runoff from the majority of the cemetery. Banks of the drainageway consist of concrete and rubble fill material. The top of bank of the drainageway is not well defined. This feature meets the General Plan definition of a drainageway as it is an open improved or man-made feature that lacks a defined bed and bank. This bottom of the drainageway is labeled on "the Corps jurisdictional map for the Project as a Wetland Waters of the U.S. Vegetation within the drainageway includes mainly upland plant species on the slopes of the drainageway, including Italian thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus), milk thistle (Silybum marianum), Himalayan blackberry, poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum) and non-native grasses, and wetland plant species in the bottom of the swale, such as small willows (Salix spp.), sedges, and cattails (Typha spp.) Northerly Draw A small (approximately 10-foot wide by 20-foot long) linear cut or "draw" is located in the northern portion of the Property in Lot 3 on the northwest bank of the creek. The Salem Howes Associates Inc. Geologic Report (2015) refers to this as the "northerly draw". This northerly draw has no apparent hydrologic function as it does not have sufficient wetland hydrology to develop wetland features such as hydrophytic vegetation. The centerline axis of the northerly draw points upstream which is not consistent with a natural drainage feature. Salem Howes Associates Inc. (2015) concludes that it is an artifact of site grading or possible excavation prior to 1950. The vegetation within the northerly draw is composed of upland non-native species including Italian thistle, milk thistle, Himalayan blackberry, and non-native grasses and non-native rose. None of these species rely on the creek hydrology and are therefore not considered riparian vegetation. Hydrology The watershed to the creek which runs through the Property includes a large portion of the cemetery, portioris of the Marin County Open Space and adjoining properties, and a portion of the houses on Shannon Lane northeast and east of the Property (Oberkamper and Associates 2012 and Salem Howes Associates Inc. 2015). Watershed flow enters the Property from the creek and from the drainageway via the culvert and cemetery stormwater system. The Oberkamper and Associates (2012) calculated the 100-year storm event to evaluate the water surface elevations throughout the Property. The site map (Oberkamper and Associates 2015b) shows the 100-year water surface elevations at three cross sections of the creek. In all cases, the 1 OO-year water surface elevations remain within the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) and Corps jurisdiction boundaries and within the creek top of bank. The 100-year water surface elevation is less than 3 feet above the channel bed at all locations and less than 1.5 feet above the channel bed upstream of the drainageway. Based on the 100-year surface water elevations, the waters of the creek always remain within the top of bank and no floodplain exists. The creek hydrology has been significantly modified by development within the upper watershed. Development of the cemetery diverted surface waters from the watershed to stormwater drains which collect waters uphill of the creek and divert them to the culvert outfall in the drainageway on site. A stockpond has been removed since 1950 that was located at the eastern upslope boundary of the cemetery which in the past flowed into the creek (Salem Howes Associates Inc., 2015). Location of Top of Bank As discussed above, top of bank is used as the extent of CDFW and State jurisdiction in the absence of riparian vegetation. However, CDFW does not have a published guidance for identifying top of bank. Below we analyze the position of top of bank as mapped on the site plans with regard to two top of bank definitions. Marin County's definition of 'top of bank' is provided in the 2007 Marin Countywide Plan (County of Marin 2007) as: Top of Bank: The elevation at which flow spills out of a stream channel and onto the floodplain. The top of bank as mapped across the site contains all discharges including the 1 OO-year flood. The 100-year flood level is generally higher in elevation than the elevation at which "flow spills out of a stream channel and onto the floodplain." Therefore, by Marin County's definition of top of bank, it would be located closer to the center of the creek than what is mapped on the site plan. And using Marin County's definition, the top of bank as mapped across the site is very conservative. The following more substantial definition of top of bank is defined by the Santa Clara Valley Water District Guidelines & Standards for Land Use Near Streams (SCVWRPC 2006) and is followed by a discussion of location of each characteristic on the site. Top of Bank: Top of bank designates a stream channel boundary which contains the majority of normal discharges and channel forming activites. The top of bank boundary will contain the active stream channel, active floodplain, and their associated banks. Top of bank of streams with levees will be delineated on the inner edge of the levee. Where there are no distinguishable features to locate top of bank, the local permitting agency (or the SCVWO) will make a determination and document, as appropriate. In the absence of this determination, the 100-year water surface will be used. The top of bank as mapped across the site contains all discharges including the 1 OO-year flood. It is generally located 5 to 10 feet laterally outside and up to 6 feet above the Corps jurisdictional boundary at the OHWM. The top of bank as mapped does not include the northerly draw. The northerly draw is not a functioning portion of the creek bank as it is above both the OHWM and the 100-year flood elevation. Salem Howes Associates Inc., (2015) state that the northerly draw did not exist prior to 1950 and may be an artifact of historical site grading or excavation. Because the northerly draw was excavated, the contours that would normally represent the top of bank have been moved further away from the creek and do not reflect the true top of bank for the sake of creek hydrologic function. For the purposes of both CDFW jurisdiction and the creek setback location, the top of bank in this location has been mapped to follow the historical and functional characterization as shown on the site plans (Oberkamper and Associates 2015b). Riparian Habitat Values Areas above the top of bank as shown on the project plans by Oberkamper & Associates (2015b) do not support riparian vegetation and are primarily non-native low grass and herbaceous vegetation and cement foundations that do not provide significant wildlife habitat. The northerly draw is not a riparian feature and has a very low habitat value due to the predominance of non-native vegetation and lack of hydrological connectivity uphill to any other waters. Habitat values of the drainageway are also low considering the man-made origin of the drainageway that collects stormwater and irrigation water that support the feature and the constructed nature of the slopes of the feature itself. The upper end of the drainageway is located at the culvert outfall and is therefore not a part of a wildlife corridor or link to addition creek habitat upslope. Areas below the top of bank provide low quality riparian habitat for the following reasons: The creek has incurred significant historical modifications of the creek banks and hydrology. The existing portions of the creek in the vicinity are highly impacted by adjacent residential development that encroaches upon the creek. Regular continued disturbance by the residential activity is also present. The creek in this project area is disconnected from any other similar habitat. Wildlife connectivity and movements along the urbanized creek is expected to be very low. The creek is culverted both upstream and downstream of the Property. Upstream, the creek in in an underground culvert and brings the waterway beneath a residential property approximately 175 feet from the northern boundary of the Property. Downstream, the creek periodically runs through culverts starting at the southern end of the property and continues underground for sUbstantial distances downstream through the City of San Rafael. Immediately upstream of the Property, the open portion creek is restricted between residential developments and extends for not more than 200 feet. The driveway of the adjacent property to the north spans the creek and limits habitat even further. Any wildlife habitat or movements would be restricted to the very small and insignificant portion of the creek along the subject Property and the adjacent property to the northeast, a distance of only approximately 400 feet. Agency Jurisdictions and Pennitting Needs u.s. Army Corps of Engineers A jurisdictional determination pursuant to Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act was issued on February 11, 2013 by the San Francisco District of the Corps of Engineers. The approved map prepared by Oberkamper & Associates (February 19, 2015b) depicts the boundaries of federal jurisdiction. The creek near the east Property boundary is labeled on the Corps jurisdictional map as Non-wetland Waters of U.S. The project does not propose to impact jurisdictional features and therefore a Corps permit is not required. Regional Water Quality Control Board In California, the State Board and the regional boards are responsible for taking certification actions for activities subject to any permit issued by the Corps. The project does not warrant the application for a Corps permit (see above). RWQCB jurisdiction generally extends to the top of bank or edge of riparian vegetation, whichever is greater. The project does not propose to extend to the top of bank or edge of riparian vegetation and therefore a RWQCB permit is not required. California Department of Fish and Wildlife The limit of CDFW jurisdiction extends only to the top of bank or riparian habitat, whichever is greater. No riparian vegetation or riparian habitat exists outside the top of bank and thus, the top of bank is the CDFW jurisdictional limit. All project construction elements are located outside the top of bank of the creek and out of CDFW jurisdiction. No direct impacts to the creek and riparian habitat will occur as a result of the proposed project. All buildings are set back from the creek top of bank and the limit of riparian vegetation to protect native riparian and wildlife habitat. The project will not substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow of the ephemeral stream. The project will not substantially change or use any material from the bed, channel or bank of the ephemeral stream. The project will not deposit debris, waste or other materials that could pass into the stream. Thus, a CDFW LSA Agreement is not warranted for this proJect. Creek Setbacks Project plans by Oberkamper & Associates (2015b) indicate the creek top of bank which is used to determine creek setbacks under the San Rafael General Plan. The creek setbacks for the project as depicted by the Oberkamper & Associates site plan are ade.quate and abide by the City of San Rafael Ordinance 14.16.080 setback criteria. Rationale for adequacy based on the criteria are given below and referred to by the numbering as listed in the General Plan and above in the "Creek Setback Regulatory Setting" section. Many of these conclusions reference the February 17, 2015 response letter from Lee Oberkamper and are not new conclusions (Oberkamper & Associates 2015a), but are included here to emphasize the appropriateness of the setbacks designed .. 1. The setback provides for adequate maintenance, emergency vehicle access, adequate debris flow avalanche corridors, flood control and protection from damage due to stream bank undercutting; Maintenance and emergency vehicle access will be provided through the Lot 3 driveway and turnaround (Oberkamper & Associates 2015a). A debris flow avalanche corridor does not appear to be needed based on the location in the watershed and the flatness of the stream gradient in the project area (Oberkamper & Associates 2015a). Debris flow in the creek will not be affected by the project and lack of expected debris flows precludes the need for a debris flow avalanche corridor. Based on the project hydrology study the setback provides for adequate flood control and protection from damage due to stream bank undercutting (Oberkamper & Associates 2015a). The extent of potential flooding during the 100-year storm is contained 6 feet or more below the top of bank through the entire creek length within the Property (see the creek cross sections on the site plans, Oberkamper & Associates, 2015b and the hydrology study, Oberkamper & Associates, 2012). No evidence of streambed undercutting is present and the oalculated flow velocities are low enough to not be erosive per the hydrology study (Oberkamper & Associates, 2012). The site appears to be relatively stable with fill soil used to channelize the drainage to control runoff and to stabilize the area during residential and cemetery development (Salem Howes Associates Inc. 2015b). 2. The setback adequately protects and preserves native riparian and wildlife habitat; The setback, as designed and shown on the site plans, adequately protects and preserves native riparian and wildlife habitat. The project footprint is limited to areas previously developed as a cemetery monument production facility that do not provide substantial riparian and/or wildlife habitat. Although the creek may provide only limited riparian habitat value, the project will not remove any riparian vegetation and the setback is adequate to minimize any impacts to creek habitat. The existing habitat function' of the creek in the vicinity is very low as a result of culverting of the creek both upstream and downstream, alteration of creek hydrology by the cemetery and adjacent residential development. 3. The setback protects major view corridors and provides for recreation opportunities where appropriate; The project will not affect any public View or access because there is no significant view corridor. The public visiting the cemetery to the north already have limited views. The tall fence and ornamental shrubs and trees along the north side of the site preclude views of the creek. Based on the location and topography of the creek and the absence of current recreational access to the creek, the area is not adequate for recreational access (Oberkamper & Associates 2015a). 4. The setback permits provision of adequate and attractive natural landscaping. The setback permits installation of 4,470 square feet of adequate and attractive natural landscaping. The site design includes planting of native vegetation in the setback to both provide a continuous natural vegetated landscape and provide for stormwater treatment in the bioswales as shown on the site plans (Oberkamper & Associates 2015a). The setback as designed is adequate to protect the creek and the low-quality habitat associated with it. Creek setbacks for the project as designed are adequate and conform to the City of San Rafael Ordinance 14.16.080 setback criteria. . If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Sean Avent Associate Biologist References County of Marin. 2007. 2007 Marin Countywide Plan. Adopted November 6, 2007. Oberkamper & Associates. 2012. Cianciarulo Property, San Rafael, CA Hydrology Study. Prepared for Ronaldo Cianciarulo. December 14. Oberkamper & Associates. 2015a. Letter of response to the determination of Incomplete Application Submittal by the City of San Rafael dated November 26, 2014 regarding S14-001 and LLA14-002 2468 Fifth Avenue. Sent from L. E. Oberkamper to Kraig Tambornini. February 17. Oberkamper & Associates. 2015b. 2468 Fifth Avenue, Lands of Coyne, Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan , San Rafael, California. February 19. Salem Howes Associates Inc. 2015. Engineering Geologic Investigation Report for 2468 Fifth Avenue, San Rafael, CA. May 18. Santa Clara Valley Water Resources Protection Collaborative (SCVWRPC). 2006. Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Streams -A Manual of Tools, Standards and Procedures to Protect Streams and Streamside Resources in Santa Clara County. August, 2005. Revised July, 2006 . Exhibit 5 Public Correspondence Exhibit 5 -PC Meeting Public Correspondence Community Development Department Planning Division City of San Rafael, P.O. Box 15160 San Rafael, CA 94915-1560 c/o Kraig Tambornini, Project Planner September 14, 2015 RE: PROJECT: 2468 Fifth Avenue (Coyne Lot Split and Adjustment) As a long-time resident and owner of 2451 5th Avenue, I have two concerns regarding the above-referenced project, both of which concern the proposed development of Lots 1 and 2 (i.e., those which will 'front' directly onto 5th Avenue). First, in the interests of safety, the placement of houses on these two lots must accommodate fully the off-street parking of cars. Second, in the interests of maintaining the character and value of the neighborhood, the houses on these two lots must be limited to one-story developments. Regarding safety, it should be clear to the Commission that the width of 5th Avenue at the point of the proposed development-when cars are parked on the opposite and only curbed side of the street-is barely sufficient at present to allow two cars to pass. For this reason, the proposed plans must include sufficient off-road space for parkfng adjacent to Lots 1 and 2. Planners should not rely on prospective homeowners to find sufficient their garages and driveways for this purpose. Regarding the character and value of the neighborhood, one only has to look at the unfortunate development at 3 Shannon Court Oust down the street from the proposed development) for an example of how the placement of a two-story structure in a one-story neighborhood can negatively impact ambiance, views, and property values. Simple mitigation of a second story with trees is not sufficient and is wholly disingenuous, as a high-rise wall will 'trump' a "red maple" every time. Unfortunately I will not be able-to attend the Planning Commission meeting on September 29 th, but I trust my concerns will be conveyed to Commission members and that I will continue to be kept informed of proposals and decisions associated with this project. Thanks sincerely, Robert Rossi, owner 2451 5th Avenue Kraig Tambornini From: Sent: To: Subject: Hi Steve. Kraig Tambornini Monday, September 21, 2015 4:57 PM 'Steve Medvic' RE: Project: 2468 Fifth Avenue ( Coyne Lot Split and Adjustment) Thanks for the comments. Here are some responses. I will also pass along your comment and any additional comments or questions to the Planning Commission and ot her departments as needed to get a complete response. -Curb and gutter wou ld be instal led per City standards along the frontage. -Dead end at Cemetery, good question. I will have to ask public works if there are any street improvements planned for that. It was not identified as an issue at initial plan check. I am passing this on to see ifthey looked at whether any further improvement could be required with this project outside of right of way that exists. -Undergrounding along frontage can be required. Undergrounding projects would usually be coordinated for a community by PGE with the local public works agency and I am fairly sure there is no un derground i ng plan currently in place for this area. We would need an instrument to pass cost of undergrounding on to other properties as t here is no nexus for this lot to underground that far. I don't know the logistics for initiating and undergrounding project, though I f ully support the concept. -I am surprised if the speed hump and issues at the cemetery were not discussed when the cemetery master plan was approved . I kn ow traffic was an issue at that time, and I would assume t his was noted, but I don't know the specifics on t hat (and can look into it further). The additional traff ic from 3 lots is not generally sufficient to cause any physical change to an existing condition. It would be very hard to find the required nexus between this project and a significant aggravation to an current condition at the street . I wi ll need to ask for input from public works on this as wel l. Whi le this is a fair point to raise regarding issues occurring right in front ofthese lots, it remains true that the amount of residential traffic from 3 lots is not significant enough to require the owner to make further improvement ofthe public road, to address an exist i ng ne ighborhood issues. To the extent they are able to improve the situation and address their contribution that is certainly reasonable and I assume has been looked at by public works. Where no further improvemen t s are identified as feasible or required, the project is requi r ed to at a minimum pay tra ffic mitigation fees to pay for improvements required at major intersections and signal. Thus, getting this existing condition resolved with this project would be unlikely. Again, I will have to ask Public Works to help wit h my res ponse so that a fully r easone d response can be provided , o r if there are any further changes we can have made to the design of the su bdivision we can look at tha t t oo. -----Original Message----- From: Steve Medvic [mailto:katie.bean@comcast.net] Sent : Monday, September 21, 2015 3:40 PM To: Kraig Tambornini Subject : Project : 2468 Fifth Aven ue ( Coyne Lot Split and Adjustme nt) 1 Kraig Tambornini From: Sent: To: Subject: Kraig, Steve Medvic <katie.bean@comcast.net> Monday, September 21, 2015 3:40 PM Kraig Tambornini Project: 2468 Fifth Avenue ( Coyne Lot Split and Adjustment) Resident/Owner 2429 Fifth Avenue Steve Medvlc Can you tell me about and my concerns: Curb and gutter. Dead end at cemetery needs wide area for turn around due to high traffic of school children drop off and posted no u-turn at Shannon way. Of which no one obeys and u-turns anyway. It would be great to require owner/applicants to underground existing electrical and public street lighting from street of: River Oaks up to cemetery , They got to give the community something for the extra traffic the we do not need. A required speed bump almost at cemetery gate would sure help slowing down all the van of Marin Access and WhistleStop buses that speed when delivering and picking up all the mentally challenged folks that learn and work at the Cedars facility. They require around 20 vehicles twice daily. Thank you Regards Steve Medvic Sent from my iPad 1 ATT1212119.txt On sep 14, 2015, at 11:45 AM, Kraig Tambornini <Krai-g.Tamborni.ni@cityofsanrafael.org> wrote: > Email is fine. Thanks for pointing that out. I will look at and r~vise > our notice template accordingly. > > -----original Message----- > From: Bob Rossi [mallto:brossi@ibuildcommunity.com] > Sent: Monday, september 14, 2015 11:07 AM > To: Kraig Tambornini > cc: Janet Graham; Diana > subject: Re: PROJECT: 2468 Fifth Avenue (coyne Lot split and Adjustment) > > Kraig, thanks very much for the prompt response. > > After a quick look, my major concerns are with what I think are Lots 1 > and 2~the ones on which houses will be situated that "front" on 5th > Avenue. > > I would like to take advantage of the opportunity to comment on these > aspects of proposed project ln writing, as I .cannot be at the meeting on > the 29th. > > please advise me if I may do so via email; the notice implies that > comments from non-attendees will be accepted only if sent in letter form > (i.e., via post). > > Thanks. > > Bob Rossi > > > On sep 14, 2015, at 10:08 AM, Kraig Tambornini > <Kraig.Tambornini@cityofsanrafael.or.g> wrote: > » Here are the plans that show this in greater detail. The flag lot is » the largest but also most constrained lot due to the wide creek » depresslon across the lot. » » -----original Message----- » From: Bob Rossi [mal.l to: brossi@ibui 1 dcommuni ty. com] » Sent: sunday, september 13, 2015 11:41 AM » To: Kraig Tambornini » Cc: Diana; Janet Graham » Subject: PROJECT: 2468 Fifth Avenue (coyne Lot split and Adjustment) » » Hi Kraig. » » The Notice provided regarding the referenced proiect is rather sparse » in terms of details beyond the reapportionment of land, which; by » itself, presents no problem to my mind. » » what is of concern to me is the proposed plan for subdividing the » 33,031 sq. ft. "vacant parcel" that results. » » please describe to me, if you can, how the proposed three lots will be page 1 Community Development Department Planning Division City of San Rafael, P.O. Box 15160 San Rafael, CA 94915-1560 c/o Kraig Tambornini, Project Planner September 14, 2015 RE: PROJECT: 2468 Fifth Avenue (Coyne Lot Split and Adjustment) As a long-time resident and owner of 2451 5th Avenue, I have two concerns regarding the above-referenced project, both of which concern the proposed development of Lots 1 and 2 (Le., those which will 'front' directly onto 5th Avenue). First, in the interests of safety, the placement of houses on these two lots must accommodate fully the off-street parking of cars. Second, in the interests of maintaining the character and value of the neighborhood, the houses on these two lots must be limited to one-story developments. Regarding safety, it should be clear to the Commission that the width of 5th Avenue atthe point ofthe proposed development-when cars are parked on the opposite and only curbed side of the street-is barely sufficient at present to allow two cars to pass. For this reason, the proposed plans must include sufficient off-road space for parking adjacent to Lots 1 and 2. Planners should not rely on prospective homeowners to find sufficient their garages and driveways for this purpose. Regarding the character and value of the neighborhood, one only has to look at the unfortunate development at 3 Shannon Court Oust down the street from the > proposed development) for an example of how the placement of a two-story structure in a one-story neighborhood can negatively impact ambiance, views, and property values. Simple mitigation of a second story with trees is not sufficient and is wholly disingenuous, as a high-rise wall will 'trump' a "red maple" every time. Unfortunately I will not be able to attend the Planning Commission meeting on September 29 th, but I trust my concerns will be conveyed to Commission members and that I will continue to be kept informed of proposals and decisions associated with this project. Thanks Sincerely, Robert Rossi, owner 2451 5th Avenue