HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission 2020-11-17 Agenda Packet
AGENDA
San Rafael Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, November 17, 2020, 7:00 P.M.
Virtual Meeting
(669) 900-9128
Meeting ID: 897-5534-1830#
CORONAVIRUS (COVID-19) ADVISORY NOTICE
In response to Executive Order N-29-20, the City of San Rafael will no longer offer an in-
person meeting location for the public to attend. This meeting will be streamed through
YouTube Live at www.youtube.com/cityofsanrafael. Comments submitted via YouTube Live
must be submitted according to the directions located on the YouTube video description.
The City is not responsible for any interrupted service. To ensure the Planning Commission
receives your comments, submit written comments to Alicia Giudice, Principal Planner
(alicia.giudice@cityofsanrafael.org), prior to the meeting. For more information regarding
real-time public comments, please visit our Live Commenting Pilot page at
https://www.cityofsanrafael.org/live-commenting-pilot/.
Want to listen to the meeting and comment in real-time over the phone? Call the telephone
number listed on this agenda and dial the Meeting ID when prompted. Feel free to contact
the City Clerk’s office at 415-485-3066 or by email to lindsay.lara@cityofsanrafael.org if you
have any questions.
Any member of the public who needs accommodations should contact the City Clerk (email
lindsay.lara@cityofsanrafael.org or phone at 415-485-3066) who will use their best efforts to
provide reasonable accommodations to provide as much accessibility as possible while also
maintaining public safety in accordance with the City procedure for resolving reasonable
accommodation requests.
Members of the public may speak on Agenda items.
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
RECORDING OF MEMBERS PRESENT AND ABSENT
APPROVAL OR REVISION OF ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION OF MEETING PROCEDURES
URGENT COMMUNICATION
Anyone with an urgent communication on a topic not on the agenda may address the
Commission at this time. Please notify the Community Development Director in advance.
CONSENT CALENDAR
PUBLIC HEARING
1. Amendments to the San Rafael Municipal Code related to a) affordable housing; b)
small lot development; c) hillside exceptions and d) appeals process.
Project Planner: Alicia Giudice, Principal Planner & Ethan Guy, Principal Analyst
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution recommending approval to the City Council of the
Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance
DISCUSSION ITEM
2. Informational Report on Renter Protections in Federally Designated Opportunity
Zone
Project Planner: Ethan Guy, Principal Analyst
Recommendation: Accept Report
DIRECTOR’S REPORT
COMMISSION COMMUNICATION
ADJOURNMENT
Any records relating to an agenda item, received by a majority or more of the Commission
less than 72 hours before the meeting, shall be available for inspection online. Sign Language
interpreters may be requested by calling (415) 485-3066 (voice), emailing
Lindsay.lara@cityofsanrafael.org or using the California Telecommunications Relay Service
by dialing “711”, at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting. Copies of documents are
available in accessible formats upon request.
The Planning Commission will take up no new business after 11:00 p.m. at regularly
scheduled meetings. This shall be interpreted to mean that no agenda item or other business
will be discussed or acted upon after the agenda item under consideration at 11:00 p.m. The
Commission may suspend this rule to discuss and/or act upon any additional agenda item(s)
deemed appropriate by a unanimous vote of the members present. Appeal rights: any person
may file an appeal of the Planning Commission's action on agenda items within five business
days (normally 5:00 p.m. on the following Tuesday) and within 10 calendar days of an action
on a subdivision. An appeal letter shall be filed with the City Clerk, along with an appeal fee
of $350 (for non-applicants) or a $4,476 deposit (for applicants) made payable to the City of
San Rafael, and shall set forth the basis for appeal. There is a $50.00 additional charge fo r
request for continuation of an appeal by appellant.
Community Development Department – Planning Division
P. O. Box 151560, San Rafael, CA 94915-1560
PHONE: (415) 485-3085/FAX: (415) 485-3184
Meeting Date: November 17, 2020
Agenda Item:
1
Case Numbers:
P18-010/ZA20-002
Project Planner:
Ali Giudice 415-485-3092
Ethan Guy 415-458-2392
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBJECT: Amendments to the San Rafael Municipal Code related to a) affordable housing; b)
small lot development; c) hillside exceptions and d) appeals process.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Staff is proposing amendments to the San Rafael Municipal Code (SRMC) intended to streamline the and
provide clarity in the planning development review process. These changes reflect direction from City
Council through a number of meetings that have occurred over the past two years where staff presented
challenges to housing production and our current housing crisis. This report if focused on the following:
A. Affordable Housing including changes to inclusionary housing and density bonus provisions
C. Hillside Exceptions process
D. Height bonus
E. Small Lot development
F. Appeals process
The full text of the Code Amendments are included in Exhibit 1.A – 1E. In addition, staff is proposing two
City Council Resolutions as follows:
a) City Council Resolution related to Affordable Housing Requirements(Exhibit 1E.i)
b) City Council Resolution related to Density Bonus and Incentives Regulations (Exhibit 1E.ii)
Staff is asking the Planning Commission to weigh in on and provide a recommendation to the City Council
for final action.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution recommending City Council approval
of the proposed Amendments to the San Rafael Municipal Code and adoption of a City Council
Resolution related Density Bonus Tables
BACKGROUND
Over the past two years the City Council has received informational reports related to housing and the
challenges to housing development as follows. The City Council directed staff to explore the issues related
to the challenges to the approval and development of housing in San Rafael and to identify changes that
could be made to facilitate housing development. Staff presented follow-up reports, met with community
members and stakeholder groups, and prepared identified a list of recommended measures that if
implemented could address challenges to housing production by providing clarity in and simplifying the
review process, providing options for development of affordable units and exploring other opportunities to
increase housing. The following is a timeline of presentations that occurred over the past year.
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case No: P18-010/ZA20-002 Page 2
August 20, 2018, the City Council was presented a comprehensive, informational report on challenges to
housing development and the approval process. In response to the housing report information, the City
Council directed staff to follow-up on four, specific housing topics and issues. One of these four
topics/issues was the challenges to the approval and development of housing in San Rafael.
September 3, 2019, City staff presented an updated informational report on challenges to housing
development. The report presented 11 key challenges pertaining to the approval and development of
housing in San Rafael and identified 13 recommended measures to address these challenges. Staff was
directed to host several public housing workshops to solicit the public’s view on the housing crisis, as well
as, to get feedback on the prioritization of on the proposed policy actions. The City hosted two housing
workshops, (which were attended by the Mayor, City Council, and the public. These workshops exposed
the public to issues surrounding the housing crisis and obtained feedback from both the public and City
Council.
On January 21, 2020, City staff presented an updated informational report on staff recommendations for
prioritization, timing, and future City Council actions on proposed policy actions to address challenges to
approving and developing housing. At this meeting the City Council directed staff to return with a report on
potential amendments to the SRMC aimed at encouraging development and streamline approvals.
On August 11th, 2020, staff presented to the San Rafael Planning Commission a report analyzing potential
amendments to the SRMC resulting from this City Council direction. At this meeting the Planning
commission provided feedback on the potential amendments and generally supported the amendments
proposed by staff.
On September 8, 2020 and September 21, 2020, the City Council received an updated report on the
status of Measures to Facilitate Housing Development & Streamline Approvals and focused on four main
areas of the SRMC:
A. Inclusionary Housing Requirement
B. Density Bonus
C. SRMC Amendments to Encourage Development and Streamline Approvals, including
amendments related to small lot development, hillside exceptions process and appeals
process.
D. Formalize Design Review Board Subcommittee
At the September 21st meeting, the City Council directed staff to proceed with Code Amendments related
to Items A-C above and to explore a pilot program for item C related to Design Review Board Advisory
Committee structure and process. This report is focused on Items A-C. More details on the background
of the proposed amendments can be located by clicking on the City Council reports for of the dates listed
above by clicking on the individual links.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION & ANALYSIS
San Rafael Municipal Code Amendments
Staff is proposing the following amendments to the San Rafael Municipal Code:
A. Section 14.16.031 - Affordable Housing related to Inclusionary Housing and Density Bonus
regulations
B. Section 14.12.040 - Exceptions to property development standards (Hillside Overlay)
C. Section 14.16.190 - Height bonus
D. Sections 14.16.300 – Property Development Standards (Residential); 14.04.030 Property
Development Standards (Commercial Districts), & 14.04.040 - Small Lots
E. DRAFT SRMC Amendments 14.28.040- Appeals
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case No: P18-010/ZA20-002 Page 3
F. DRAFT City Council Resolution -Density Bonus and Concessions Tables
For detailed description of the proposed amendments refer to City Council Agenda Reports of September
8, 2020 and September 21, 2020.
City Council Resolution Documents
Density Bonus regulations - Due to the number of changes to State Density Bonus Law that have occurred
over the past few years, staff is recommending an amendment to the Density Bonus Regulations
referencing a separate City Council resolution where details of the City density bonus regulations, including
density bonus percentages, allowable concessions, allowable parking ratios and review procedures, would
be set forth.
Adoption of the density bonus regulation by separate City Council resolution allows the city to incorporate
changes that occur to SDBL in an expedited process assuring that we stay aligned with State legislation.
The separate resolution is included in this report as Exhibit 1E.ii.
Affordable Housing Requirements – This policy resolution would establish the affordable housing obligation
required of new housing development and would provide expanded options allowing the affordable housing
obligation to through on-site development of units, off-site development of units, land donations, payment
of an affordable housing in-lieu fee or a combination of the aforementioned. Adoption of separate
Resolution document allows for a program review and reporting after 18 months and regular updates to
the City Council thereafter. The separate resolution is included in this report as Exhibit 1E.i.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
This project qualifies for exemption from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act
Guidelines pursuant to Sections 15183(a) because it entails a project that can be found consistent with
the General Plan policies and pursuant to 15061(b)(3), which states that as a ‘general rule’ the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) applies only to projects which have the potential to cause a
significant, physical environmental effects.
NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING / CORRESPONDENCE
Notice of hearing for the project was conducted in accordance with noticing requirements contained in
Chapter 29 of the Zoning Ordinance. A Notice of Public Hearing was mailed to neighborhood
associations and neighborhood advocates, housing advocates, local developers and other stakeholders
at least 15 days prior to meeting. In addition, notice of the meeting was posted in the Marin IJ.
Comments received prior to the distribution of this meeting are attached to this report. All public
comments received to date on the topics outlined in this report are included as Exhibit 2. Comments
received subsequent to distribution of this staff report will be forwarded to the City Council by separate
cover. Additional community outreach that has been conducted on the general housing topic and topic
areas in this report is outlined in the September 8 informational report to the City Council.
OPTIONS
The Planning Commission has the following options:
1. Adopt Resolution recommending approval of the proposed amendments as presented.
2. Adopt Resolution recommending approval with some modifications to the proposed amendments.
3. Continue the hearing to allow staff to address the Commission’s comments or concerns.
4. Continue the hearing to allow staff to prepare resolutions for denial of the proposed amendments.
EXHIBITS
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case No: P18-010/ZA20-002 Page 4
1. Resolution recommending Amendments to the San Rafael Municipal Code and recommending
adoption of City council Resolutions related to Inclusionary Housing and Density Bonus Regulations
A. DRAFT SRMC Amendments to 14.12.040 - Exceptions to property development standards
B. DRAFT SRMC Amendments to 14.16.190 - Height bonus
C. DRAFT SRMC Amendments to 14.16.300, 14.04.030, & 14.04.040- Small Lots
D. DRAFT SRMC Amendments 14.28.040- Appeals
E. DRAFT SRMC Amendments Section 14.16.030 Affordable Housing
i. City Council Resolution related to Affordable Housing Requirements
ii. City Council Resolution related to Density Bonus and Incentives Regulations
2. Public Comments
Exhibit 1 Page-1
RESOLUTION NO. _____
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE OF
THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AMENDING TITLE 14 (ZONING ORDINANCE),
INCLUDING: A) REVISIONS TO THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING REQUIREMENT
FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS; B) REVISIONS TO THE DENSITY
BONUS AND HEIGHT BONUS PROVISIONS; C) REVISIONS TO LIMITATIONS
PLACED ON RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF SMALL LOTS; D) REVISIONS TO
SCHEDULING PROCESS FOR APPEALS; E) REVISIONS TO THE REVIEW
REQUIREMENTS FOR EXCEPTIONS TO HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENTS
(P18-010/ ZO20-002)
WHEREAS, on August 20, 2018, the City Council held a duly noticed public meeting and
was presented a comprehensive information report on housing topics and issues, accepting all
public testimony and the written report of the Community Development Department; and
WHEREAS, on September 3, 2019, the City Council held a duly noticed public meeting
and was presented a comprehensive information report challenges to housing development,
accepting all public testimony and the written report of the Community Development Department.
Staff was directed to conduct public housing workshops on proposed policies to address challenges
to approving and developing housing to gain a better understanding of the public’s view on the
housing crisis, as well as, to get feedback on the prioritization of the proposed policy actions; and
WHEREAS, on January 21, 2020, the City Council held a duly noticed public meeting
and was presented a comprehensive information report outlining the findings of the public housing
workshops and recommendations for prioritization, timing, and future City Council actions on
proposed policy actions to address challenges to approving and developing housing, accepting all
public testimony and the written report of the Community Development Department. Staff was
directed to return with an updated informational report on potential amendments to the SRMC
aimed at encouraging housing development and streamlining approvals; and
WHEREAS, on August 11, 2020, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public
meeting and was presented a comprehensive information report analyzing potential amendments
to the SRMC resulting from the January 21, 2020 City Council direction, accepting all public
testimony and the written report of the Community Development Department and providing
feedback for City Council consideration of potential amendments to the SRMC aimed at
encouraging housing development and streamlining approvals; and
WHEREAS, on September 8, 2020 and September 21, 2020, the City Council held a duly-
noticed public hearings on the proposed amendments to the SRMC Title 14, accepting all public
testimony and the written report of the Community Development Department, and directing staff
to prepare amendments to SRMC Title 14 for the Planning Commission to provide a
recommendation ; and
WHEREAS, on November 17, 2020, the Planning Commission, reviewed the proposed
amendments to SRMC Title 14, including revisions to the affordable housing requirement, density
bonus and height bonus provisions, limitations for residential development of small lots, appeal
scheduling process, and review requirements for hillside development exceptions; and
Exhibit 1 Page-2
WHEREAS, the amendments to the San Rafael Municipal Code Title 14 do not propose
any changes to City policies or regulations that would result in a direct or indirect physical,
environmental impact; therefore it has been determined that this ordinance amendment qualifies
for exemption pursuant to Sections 15183(a) because it entails a project that can be found consistent
with the General Plan policies and pursuant to 15061(b)(3), which states that as a ‘general rule’ the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) applies only to projects which have the potential to
cause a significant, physical environmental; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission recommends
to the City Council adoption of the amendments to the San Rafael Municipal Code as outlined in
Attachment A of this resolution, based on the following findings as required under Zoning Code
Section 14.27.060:
1. The amendments to San Rafael Municipal Code Title 14 – Zoning Ordinance are
consistent with the policies and programs of the San Rafael General Plan 2020 in that:
a. The proposed amendments related to Inclusionary Housing is consistent with
General Plan Policy H-6. Funding for Affordable Housing and H-18.
Inclusionary Housing Requirements identifies the intent to provide for and
allow flexibility in providing affordable units as long as the intent of the
inclusionary housing policy are being met. The proposed amendments
provides for alternatives that include in-lieu fees, construction of units off-site,
donation of property for affordable housing development;
b. The proposed amendments related to density bonus and height bonus
regulations is consistent with General Plan Policy H-17. Regulatory Processes
and Incentives for Affordable Housing which emphasized the City’s intent to
comply with State Density Bonus Law; and with General Plan policy H-15-
Infill Near Transit, which encourage higher densities on sites adjacent to a
transit hub, because the proposed amendments would align the city’s
regulations with State Density Bonus law, which encourages affordable
housing near transit by allowing incentives that include height bonuses;
c. The proposed amendments related to small lot development is consistent with
General Plan Policy H-14b. Efficient Use of Multifamily Housing Sites
because the effected lots within the city would be able to develop at the
designated densities;
d. The proposed amendments to the appeals process and hillside exceptions
process is consistent with General Plan Policy H-17d. Efficient Project Review
as these amendments are intended to provide a more efficient review process
without compromising public participation.
2. The public health, safety and general welfare are served by adoption of the proposed
Zoning Ordinance amendments, in that the amendments are intended to remove
barriers to housing production by providing alternatives for meeting the affordable
housing obligations; aligning the City’s density bonus regulations with State Density
Bonus Law; allowing development of small lots at their designated density as
established in the General Plan; provide for streamlined review of hillside exceptions;
and provide for streamlined appeals process.
Exhibit 1 Page-3
The foregoing Resolution was adopted at the regular City of San Rafael Planning Commission
meeting held on the 17th day of November, 2020.
Moved by Commissioner _________ and seconded by Commissioner _________.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS
NOES: COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS
SAN RAFAEL PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST: _______________________________
Paul A. Jensen, Secretary
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Amendments to San Rafael Municipal Code Title 14 Zoning Ordinance
14.12.040 - Exceptions to property development standards.
City Council Exception Required. Exceptions to the property development standards of this chapter
may be approved by the planning commission city council, upon the recommendation of the design
review board and the planning commission, when the applicant has demonstrated that alternative design
concepts carry out the objectives of this chapter and are consistent with the general plan based on the
following criteria:
A.The project design alternative meets the stated objectives of the hillside design guidelines to
preserve the inherent characteristics of hillside sites, display sensitivity to the natural hillside
setting and compatibility with nearby hillside neighborhoods, and maintain a strong relationship
to the natural setting; and
B. Alternative design solutions which minimize grading, retain more of the project site in its natural
state, minimize visual impacts, protect significant trees, or protect natural resources result in a
demonstrably superior project with greater sensitivity to the natural setting and compatibility with
and sensitivity to nearby structures.
Attachment A
Planning Commission Resolution ______
Amendments to the San Rafael Municipal Code
14.16.190 - Height bonus.
A.Downtown Height Bonuses. A height bonus may be granted by a use permit approved by
the planning commission in the following downtown zoning districts. No more than one
height bonus may be granted for a project.
1.In the Fourth Street retail core, a twelve-foot (12′) height bonus for any of the following:
a.Affordable housing, consistent with 14.16.030 (Affordable housing). 14.16.031.
(Density Bonus and Incentives);
b.Public courtyards, plazas and/or passageways, with the recommendation of the
design review board that the public improvements are consistent with downtown
design guidelines;
c.Public parking, providing it is not facing Fourth Street and it is consistent with the
downtown design guidelines.
2.In the Lindaro district, on lots south of Second Street and fronting Lindaro Street, a
twenty-four-foot (24′) height bonus for any of the following:
a.Park area adjacent to Mahon Creek, accessible to the public and maintained by
the property owner;
b.Community facility, ten thousand (10,000) square feet or more in size. The facility
must be available to the public for cultural and community events, and maintained
and operated by the property owner.
3.In the Second/Third mixed use east district, a twelve-foot (12′) height bonus for any of
the following:
a.Affordable housing, consistent with Section 14.16.030 (Affordable housing).
14.16.031. (Density Bonus and Incentives);
b.Public parking, providing it is consistent with the downtown design guidelines;
c.Skywalks over Second or Third Streets, with the approval of the traffic engineer,
and the recommendation of the design review board;
d.Mid-block passageways between Fourth Street and parking lots on Third Street,
with the recommendation of the design review board that the design is attractive
and safe.
4.In the West End Village, a six-foot (6′) height bonus for any of the following:
a.Affordable housing, consistent with Section 14.16.030 (Affordable housing).
14.16.031. (Density Bonus and Incentives);
b.Public parking, providing it is consistent with the downtown design guidelines;
c.Public passageways, with the recommendation of the design review board that the
public passageway serves an important public purpose and is attractive and safe.
5.In the Second/Third mixed use west district, on lots located on the north side of Third
Street and east of C Street, an eighteen-foot (18′) height bonus for the following:
a.Public parking, providing it is consistent with the downtown design guidelines.
B.Lincoln Avenue Height Bonus. A twelve-foot (12′) height bonus may be granted for
affordable housing on Lincoln Avenue between Mission Avenue and Hammondale Ct., on
lots greater than one hundred fifty (150′) in width and twenty thousand (20,000) square feet
in size, consistent with Section 14.16.030 (Affordable housing). 14.16.031. (Density Bonus
and Incentives).
C.Marine Square Height Bonus. A twenty-four-foot (24′) height bonus may be granted for
affordable housing at the Marin Square and Gary Place properties, consistent with Section
14.16.030 (Affordable housing). 14.16.031. (Density Bonus and Incentives).
D.North San Rafael Town Center Height Bonus. A twenty-four-foot (24′) height bonus may be
granted for affordable housing in the North San Rafael Town Center, consistent with
Section 14.16.030 (Affordable housing). 14.16.031. (Density Bonus and Incentives) .
E.Hotel Height Bonus. A height bonus of twelve feet (12′) may be granted for a hotel provided
the planning commission finds that the hotel will be a significant community benefit and the
design is consistent with design review board recommendations.
F.Residential Development projects with 100% of the total units available to lower income
households, and such development project is located within one-half mile of a major transit
stop, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code, shall be
eligible for a height increase of up to 33 feet. This bonus shall not be combined with any
other height bonus listed above.
14.04.040 - Property development standards (DR, MR, HR).
NA: Not applicable.
Note: See Chapter 14.16, Site and Use Regulations, for additional regulations pertaining to other site
development standards, Chapter 14.23, Variances, Chapter 14.24, Exceptions, for allowable adjustments
to these standards, and Chapter 14.25, Environmental and Design Review Permits, for a listing of
improvements subject to review (including addition of new units or additions of floor area to existing units)
and design guidelines and criteria for development.
Table 14.04.040
DR MR5 MR3 MR2.5 MR2 HR1.8 HR1.5 HR1 Additional
Standards
Minimum lot area
(sq. ft.)
5,000/6,000
(corner) 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000
Minimum lot
area/dwelling unit
(sq. ft.) (Max.
residential
intensity)
2,500 5,000 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,800 1,500 1,000 (A), (B), (C)
Minimum lot width
(ft.)
50/60
(corner lot) 60 60 60 60 60 60 60
Minimum yards
Front (ft.) 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 (D), (E)
Side (ft.)
10% of lot
width, min.
3ʹ, max. 5ʹ
10 10 10 10
10% of
lot
width,
min.
3ʹ,
max.
5ʹ
10% of
lot
width,
min.
3ʹ,
max.
5ʹ
10% of
lot
width,
min.
3ʹ,
max.
5ʹ
Street side (ft.) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 (E), (F), (G)
Side providing
pedestrian access
NA 15 15 15 15 12 12 12 (F), (N)
(ft.)
Rear (ft.) 10 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 (F), (H), (I)
Distance between
res. structures
No primary
pedestrian access
to structures (ft.)
NA 15 15 15 15 8 8 8 (N)
Primary
pedestrian access
to structures (ft.)
NA 20 20 20 20 20 20 20
Maximum height
of structure (ft.) 30 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 (J), (K)
Maximum lot
coverage 40% 40% 50% 50% 50% 60% 60% 60%
Minimum usable
outdoor area
(common and/or
private)/Dwelling
unit (sq. ft.)
200 200 200 200 200 150 150 100 (L)
Landscaping
50% front
and street
side yards
50%
front
and
street
side
yards
50%
front
and
street
side
yards
50%
front
and
street
side
yards
50%
front
and
street
side
yards
50%
front
and
street
side
yards
50%
front
and
street
side
yards
50%
front
and
street
side
yards
(M)
Parking * * * * * * * *
*Based on
use. See
Section
14.18.040.
(A) Outside of downtown, only one unit is permitted, and no additional units are permitted, on lots
less than five thousand (5,000) square feet, per Section 14.16.300 (Small lots).
(B) The minimum lot area for a boarding house is five hundred (500) square feet per guest room.
(C) A density bonus may be granted, as provided for in Section 14.16.030 (Density bonus).
(D) Where two (2) or more lots in a block have been improved with buildings, the minimum
required shall be standard, or the average of improved lots on both sides of the street for the
length of the block, whichever is less.
(E) Where there is a driveway perpendicular to the street, any garage built after January 1, 1991,
shall be set back twenty feet (20′).
(F) Parking and maneuvering areas, excluding access driveways, shall be prohibited in all required
yards, per Section 14.18.200 (Location of parking and maneuvering areas) of this title.
(G) In the DR and MR district, on a reverse corner lot, the rear twenty feet (20′) of the street side
shall have a fifteen-foot setback.
(H) In the MR or HR districts, where development is adjacent to a single-family district, the rear
yard setback shall be ten feet (10′).
(I) In order to provide adequate privacy and sunlight, additional separation may be required
through design review.
(J) The height limit in the Latham Street neighborhood ranges from thirty feet (30′) to thirty-six feet
(36′). See the downtown height map for lot-specific information.
(K) A height bonus may be granted, as provided for in Section 14.16.190 (Height bonus).
(L) Private yard areas shall have a minimum dimension of six feet (6′). In the HR districts, common
indoor area suitable for recreational uses may be counted toward the usable outdoor area
requirement.
(M) Where a driveway is located in a side yard, a minimum of three feet (3′) of buffer landscaping
shall be provided between the driveway and side property line. The required rear yard shall be
landscaped to provide a buffer.
(N) Setback distances apply to areas that provide a primary pedestrian access only.
14.05.030 - Property development standards (GC, NC, O, C/O, R/O, FBWC).
NR: Not required unless otherwise noted in Additional Standards. NA: Not applicable.
Note: See Chapter 14.16, Site and Use Regulations, for additional regulations pertaining to floor area
ratio, and site development standards. See Chapter 14.23, Variances, and Chapter 14.24, Exceptions, for
allowable adjustments to these standards, and Chapter 14.25, Environmental and Design Review
Permits, for a listing of improvements subject to review and design guidelines and criteria for
development.
Table 14.05.030
GC NC O C/O R/O FBWC Additional
Standards
Minimum lot area (sq. ft.) 6,000 6,000 7,500 2,000/
building 6,000 6,000
Minimum lot
area/dwelling unit (sf)
(Max. residential
intensity)
1,000 1,800 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 (A), (N), (O)
Floor area ratio (Max.
nonresidential intensity) * * * * * * *See Section
14.16.150
Minimum lot width (ft.) 60 60 60 NR 60 60
Minimum yards:
Front (ft.) NR NR 20 NR NR NR (B)
Side (ft.) NR NR 6 NR NR NR (B)
Street side (ft.) NR NR 10 NR NR NR (B)
Rear (ft.) NR NR 20 NR NR NR (B)
Maximum height of
structure (ft.) 36
36 feet; 30 feet for
a residential-only
building
36 36 36 36 (C), (D), (E), (F),
(G), (H)
Maximum lot coverage NR NR 40% NR NR NR (P)
Minimum landscaping 15% 10% 25% NR 10% 15% (I), (J), (K), (L)
Usable outdoor area NR NR NR NR NR NR (M)
Parking * * * * * *
*Based on use.
See Section
14.18.040
(A)There is no minimum lot area requirement for a boarding house.
(B)Where the frontage of a block is partially in an R district, the front yard shall be the same as
required for that R district, and when the side and/or rear of the lot(s) abuts an R district, the
respective side and/or rear yard shall be ten feet (10′). Parking or maneuvering shall be
permitted within the required side and rear yards provided that a minimum six-foot (6′) wide
landscape buffer area, excluding curbs, is provided adjacent to the side and rear property lines.
(C)Exceptions may be granted for a height above thirty-six feet (36′), subject to the provisions of
Chapter 14.24, Exceptions.
(D)Hotels have a four (4) story fifty-four-foot (54′) height limit. A one-story twelve-foot (12′) height
bonus may be approved as part of a design review permit by the planning commission if it finds
that the hotel will provide a significant community benefit, and the design is consistent with this
title.
(E)Repealed 3/18/96.
(F)Buildings existing or approved as of January 1, 1987 which are more than three (3) stories in
height shall not be considered nonconforming, and are listed in Section 14.16.040, Buildings
over three (3) stories.
(G)See general plan downtown height map for lot-specific height limits.
(H)A height bonus may be permitted in residential development as provided for in Section
14.16.190, Height bonus.
(I)Where the frontage of the lot(s) is adjacent to or across from an R district, fifty percent (50%) of
the front yard shall be landscaped. Where the side yard abuts an R district, a minimum three
feet (3′) of buffer landscaping must be provided. Where the rear of the lot abuts an R district, ten
feet (10′) of buffer landscaping must be provided.
(J)In the GC district, a minimum fifteen feet (15′) of the front setback must be landscaped.
Landscaped portions of the public right-of-way may be included, subject to approval by the
hearing body.
(K)For parking lot landscaping, see Section 14.18.160, Parking lot screening and landscaping.
(L)A landscaped amenity area for employees and the public is encouraged in office and
commercial projects.
(M)Provision of usable outdoor area is encouraged in residential development as part of a mixed-
use project.
(N)Outside of downtown, only one unit is permitted, and no additional units are permitted, on lots
less than five thousand (5,000) square feet, per Section 14.16.300 (Small lots).
(O)A density bonus may be granted, as provided for in Section 14.16.090.
(P) The maximum lot coverage restriction established for the office (O) district shall not apply to
solar panels installed over existing paved parking spaces; consistent with Section 14.16.307.
14.16.300 - Small lots.
Development of small lots shall be permitted in accordance with all the requirements of the district.
Such development shall be considered conforming with the following additional limits in residential
districts:
A.Vacant small lots less than five thousand (5,000) square feet in size shall be developed with
only one unit in accordance with all the requirements of the district, and no additional units shall
be added to developed small lots less than five thousand (5,000) square feet in size. Small
downtown lots are exempt from this section; they shall be developed in accordance with all the
requirements of the district.
B.No small lot shall be further reduced in area or width, except as required for public
improvements.
C.Small lots which are contiguously owned are subject to the merger provisions of the State
Subdivision Map Act.
D.This section does not apply to the PD district.
14.28.040 - Public notice and hearing Scheduling and noticing for a public hearing.
A.Public hearing required. The planning commission or city council, as the case
may be, shall hold a public hearing on an appeal. At the public hearing, the appellate
body shall review the record of the decision and hear testimony of the appellant, the
applicant, and any other interested party.
B.Public hearing scheduled. Following the timely filing of an appeal, said appeal
shall be scheduled for the next available planning commission or city council meeting, as
the case may be, and allowing sufficient time for giving notice pursuant to subsection (C)
of this section and State law.
C.Public hearing Nnotice. Notice of a public hearings shall be given in the
manner required for the decision being appealed, as set forth in SRMC Section
14.29.020.
14.16.030 - Affordable housing requirement.
A. Purpose & Intent. The purpose of this section is to enhance the public welfare and ensure
that further residential and nonresidential development projects within the city contribute to
the attainment of affordable housing goals and requirements by promoting and increasing,
through actual construction and/or alternative equivalent actions as provided for in this
section, the development of rental and ownership housing units for very low, low and
moderate income households.
B. General Requirements—Residential Development Projects. Any new residential
development project with dwelling units intended or designed for permanent occupancy shall
be developed to provide affordable housing units to very low, low and moderate income
households in perpetuity unless, in its sole discretion and upon a finding of need pursuant to
subsection E of this section, the city council reduces the time frame to not less than forty
(40) years.
1. Exemptions. This provision shall be imposed on all residential development projects
except that the following shall be exempt from the provisions of this section:
a. Projects that are the subject of development agreements in effect with the city
and approved prior to the effective date of the city council ordinance;
b. Projects where a building permit application has been accepted as complete
by the city prior to the effective date of the city council ordinance; however,
any extension or modification of such approval or permit after such date shall
not be exempt;
c. Any building that is damaged or destroyed by fire or other natural catastrophe
if the rebuilt square footage of the residential portion of the building does not
increase upon reconstruction;
d. Any residential development project of four (4) or fewer units in a single
structure;
e. Any residential development project of four (4) or fewer units where the
square footage of the floor area of each unit, exclusive of garage, is less than
one thousand eight hundred (1,800) square feet; and
f. Second units approved by the city of San Rafael pursuant to Section
14.16.285 of the San Rafael Municipal Code.
2. Affordable Housing Units—Percentage Required. Residential development projects
shall provide affordable housing units as described in the policies and procedures
specified in the San Rafael City Council's "policies and procedures for the
administration of the ‘affordable housing requirement program’, as adopted and
amended from time to time by city council resolution, and any new residential
development project shall comply with such policy. follows:
Project Size Percentage of Affordable Housing Units
2—10 Housing Units* 10%
Project Size Percentage of Affordable Housing Units
11—20 Housing Units 15%
21 or more Housing Units 20%
*See exemptions listed in subsection (B)(1) of this section.
Where the required percentage of affordable housing units results in a fractional unit, or a
combination of affordable housing units and fractional units, the developer shall provide the
following:
a.Pay an in-lieu fee for the fractional unit below 0.5 unit;
b.Construct the next higher whole number of affordable housing units for a
fractional unit 0.5 and above; or
c. Perform an "alternative equivalent action" subject to review and approval by
the city council in accordance with subsection G of this section.
3.Location and Type of Affordable Housing Units. Affordable housing units shall be
dispersed throughout the residential development project. Units may be clustered
within the residential project when the city determines that such clustering
furthers affordable housing opportunities. The affordable housing units shall be of a
similar mix and type to that of the residential development project as a whole,
including, but not limited to:
a.The same or substantially similar mix of unit size (e.g., number of
bedrooms, square footage);
b.Compatibility with the design, materials, amenities, and appearance of the
other developed units.
4.Timing of Construction. All affordable housing units shall be constructed prior to or
concurrent with the construction of market rate housing units unless the city council,
in its sole discretion, determines an alternative construction schedule will further the
goal of affordable housing in the city.
C.Requirements for Residential Ownership Housing Developments. A minimum of fifty percent
(50%) of all affordable housing units developed pursuant to subsection B of this section, and
that are a part of or are included in a residential development project in which the developed
dwelling units are intended for sale, shall be affordable to low-income households, at
an affordable sales price, as defined in this title and as, from time to time, may be amended
by resolution of the city council. The remaining affordable housing units shall
be affordable to moderate-income households at an affordable sales price. In the event that
an odd number of units are required, the additional unit shall be affordable to low-income
households.
D.Requirements for Residential Rental Housing Developments. A minimum of fifty percent
(50%) of all affordable housing units developed pursuant to subsection B of this section, and
that are part of or included in a residential development project in which the developed units
are intended to be used as rental housing, shall have rents that do not exceed
the affordable monthly rent of very low-income households, as those terms are defined in
this title and as, from time to time, may be amended by resolution of the city council. The
remaining affordable housing units shall have rents that do not exceed
the affordable monthly rent of low-income households, as defined in this title. In the event
that an odd number of units are required, the additional unit shall be affordable to very low-
income households.
E. Initial Occupancy, Control of Resale and Continued Affordability of Affordable Housing Units
in Residential Development Projects. Prior to the issuance of certificates of occupancy or
the final inspection for any units in a qualifying project, all regulatory agreements and, if
the affordable housing units are owner-occupied, resale restrictions, deeds of trust, and/or
other documents as may be required and approved by the city council, shall be recorded by
the city, or its agent, against all parcels having such affordable housing units and shall be
effective in perpetuity; except that, in its sole discretion and upon a finding of financial need
or infeasibility, the city council may reduce the affordability time frame to not less than forty
(40) years.
1. Ownership Units. Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, the following
conditions and/or restrictions shall apply to housing units developed for ownership:
a. The maximum sales price permitted for resale of an affordable housing unit
intended for owner-occupancy shall be limited to the amount provided in the
resale restrictions and option to purchase agreement between the owner of
the affordable unit and the city or its designee, entered into prior to issuance of
any building permits for the project.
b. The city shall have first right to purchase, or assign its right to purchase,
such affordable unit(s) at the maximum price that could be charged to an eligible
household, as set forth in the resale restrictions and option to purchase
agreement between the owner and the city or its designee.
No purchase and/or sale transaction(s) for owner
occupied affordable housing units shall be permitted without express approval by
the city or its designee of the purchasing household's eligibility. Nothing in this
section shall prohibit the sale and/or purchase of an owner-
occupied affordable housing unit if the city fails to make a determination of
household eligibility within the time or other limits provided by the regulatory
agreements or resale restrictions.
2. Rental Units. The owner of a property developed for rental occupancy under the
provisions of this section ("the property owner"), or the property owner's designee,
shall be responsible for selecting qualified tenants pursuant to the regulatory
agreement entered into by and between the property owner and the city. The
property owner or the designee shall provide annual reports to the city or its
designee containing information on the rent charged for the affordable unit and the
tenant eligibility as set forth in the regulatory agreement.
F.In-Lieu Fees for Residential Development. At the discretion of the city council, a developer
may comply with this section by paying an in-lieu fee provided that the applicant establishes
financial need or infeasibility, and that the city council makes a determination that payment
by the developer of the in-lieu fee will further the affordable housing goals of the city in a
manner and/or in an amount at least equivalent to the requirements of subsection B of this
section. Where the application of the affordable housing requirement in subsection B of this
section results in less than one unit or one or more affordable housing units and a fractional
unit, the developer may choose to pay an in-lieu fee for the fractional unit without
the required findings noted above.
In-lieu fees for residential projects shall be calculated as a percentage of the projected
construction costs of the units. Construction costs of the units shall mean the estimated cost
per square foot of construction, site development and land costs and permits and fees, as
established by standard construction cost indices and/or surveys of local development
projects.
The amounts and calculation of the housing in-lieu fee shall be established by resolution of
the city council as amended from time to time. Unless otherwise preempted by law or as
otherwise approved by the planning commission or city council, the in-lieu fee shall be paid
prior to the issuance of a building permit for the proposed project.
G.Alternative Equivalent Action. The developer of a residential project may propose to meet
the requirement of subsection B of this section by an "alternative equivalent action," which
shall be subject to review and approval by the city council. A proposal for an alternative
equivalent action may include, but is not limited to, dedication of vacant land, the
construction of affordable housing units on another site, or other actions that the city council,
in its sole discretion, determines may further the affordable housing goals of the city in a
manner and/or in an amount at least equivalent to the requirements of subsection B of this
section.
H.Density Bonus and Incentives Concessions or Incentives for Residential Development
Projects.
1.Density Bonus. Upon a separate application by an applicant for a residential
development project of five (5) or more units, that includes an eligible affordable
housing project, including such residential development projects that include as a
component of the development a housing for transitional foster youth, qualified
student housing, land donation, or construction of a child care facility, or for a
qualified senior citizen housing development, or a qualified commercial projects that
partner with a qualified affordable housing project. as defined in California Civil Code
Section 51.3, the city shall grant shall be eligible for a density bonus, as well as an
additional concession or incentive or waiver/reductions of development standards,
consistent with the requirements of California Government Code Section 65915 and
as set forth by City Council Resolution XXX. The applicant may request a lesser
density bonus than that which is available to the project under Section 65915;
however, the city shall not be required to similarly reduce the number of
units required to be dedicated pursuant to Section 65915(b). In calculating the
density bonus for a project, each project shall be entitled to only one density bonus,
to be selected based on the percentage of units dedicated pursuant to Section
65915(b). Density bonuses from more than one income category may not be
combined.
2.The city may, at its sole discretion, grant a density bonus exceeding the state
minimum requirements where the applicant agrees to construct a greater number
of affordable housing units than required pursuant to subsection (B)(2) of this section
and necessary to qualify for the density bonus under this section. If such additional
density bonus is granted by the city and accepted by the applicant, the additional
density bonus shall be considered an additional concession or incentive for purposes
of Section 65915.
3.For purposes of this section, a concession or incentive shall mean any reduction in
site development standards or any modification of zoning or architectural
design requirements necessary pursuant to California Government Code Section
65915(d)(3) or 65915(e) to facilitate the construction of the residential development
project at the densities provided for in Section 65915. Concessions or incentives
shall also include, but not be limited to, the following categories:
a.Concessions Not Requiring Financial Pro Forma from Applicant. The following
concessions and incentives shall be available to the applicant without
any requirement that the applicant demonstrates to the city that the requested
concession or incentive results in identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual
cost reductions to the project pursuant to California Government Code Section
65915(l):
i.Parking Concessions. The following maximum parking standards,
inclusive of handicapped and guest parking, shall apply to the entire
project:
0—1 bedroom dwelling unit 1 on-site parking space
2—3 bedroom dwelling units 2 on-site parking spaces
4 or more bedroom dwelling units 2.5 parking spaces
Except that, for residential development projects in the downtown parking assessment district or
in downtown areas outside the assessment district, the parking requirements set forth in
Sections 14.18.040 and 14.04.060 of this title shall apply. For purposes of this section, on-site
parking may be provided through tandem parking or uncovered parking;
ii.Waiver of planning and building fees subject to city council Resolution
11025;
iii.Height bonuses, as identified and listed in Exhibit 10 of the General Plan
2020 Land Use Element;
iv. Up to a twenty percent (20%) deviation from yard setback requirements,
with each deviation counting as one concession or incentive;
v. Up to a twenty percent (20%) deviation for lot coverage requirements;
vi. Up to a twenty percent (20%) reduction in landscape requirements.
b. Concessions Requiring Financial Pro Forma from Applicant. The following
concessions and incentives, when requested by the applicant, shall require the
applicant to demonstrate to the city council that the requested concession or
incentive results in identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual cost reductions to
the project pursuant to California Government Code Section 65915(l):
i. Reduction in the minimum requirements of any of the following: lot area;
lot width; setbacks; distance between residential structures; usable
outdoor space; private yard area; landscape requirements, including for
parking lots; and architectural design requirements that exceed the
minimum building standards established by local or state building code
standards;
ii. Increases in the maximum requirements, above the levels identified in
subsection (H)(3)(a) of this section, for any of the following: lot coverage;
building height; percentage of compact parking spaces; floor area ratio for
nonresidential development; fence height; and sign area or maximum
dimensions;
iii. Reduced parking space dimensions, driveway width, parking aisle width,
garage and carport dimensions; location of parking spaces within setback
areas; and reduced bicycle parking requirements;
iv. For hillside parcels: increase in maximum gross building size on hillside
parcels; decrease in proportion of required natural state; and exception
for development within one hundred (100) vertical feet of a visually
significant ridgeline for hillside parcels;
v. Any other reduction or waiver in site development standards or
modification of zoning or architectural design requirements necessary
pursuant to California Government Code Section 65915(d)(3) or
65915(e), or any other proposed concession or incentive not identified in
subsection (H)(3)(a) of this section.
Each of the concessions or incentives identified in subsection (H)(3)(b) of this section
shall require the approval of the city council.
4. An application for a density bonus, incentive, concession, waiver, modification, or
revised parking standard pursuant to this section shall be submitted in conjunction
with the project application and shall be processed concurrently with all other
applications required for the project in the manner provided for in Division 5 of Title
14 of the city's code. The cost of reviewing any required pro forma data submitted as
part of the application in support of a request for a concession or incentive, including,
but not limited to, the cost to the city of hiring a consultant to review said pro forma,
shall be borne by the applicant. The application shall be submitted on a form
provided by the city and shall include, at a minimum, the following information:
a.A site plan showing the total number of units, the number and location of the
units dedicated pursuant to California Government Code Section 65915(b), and
the number and location of the proposed density bonus units;
b.The level of affordability of the dedicated units;
c.A description of any requested incentives, concessions, waivers or modifications
of development standards, or modified parking standards. If the applicant is
requesting concessions or incentives identified in subsection (H)(3)(b) of this
section, the application shall also include pro forma information demonstrating to
the city that the requested concession or incentive results in an identifiable,
financially sufficient, and actual cost reduction. Where the applicant is requesting
the modification or waiver of a development standard or a zoning or architectural
design requirement, the applicant shall submit evidence demonstrating that the
application of the subject standard or requirement would preclude construction of
the project at the densities provided for in California Government Code Section
65915 and that the waiver or modification is necessary to make development of
the project financially feasible;
d.If a density bonus is requested for a land donation pursuant to California
Government Code Section 65915(h), the application shall show the location of
the land to be dedicated and provide evidence that the requirements of Section
65915(h) have been met, thus entitling the project to the requested density
bonus;
e.If a density bonus is requested for construction of a child care facility pursuant to
California Government Code Section 65915(i), the application shall show the
location and square footage of the proposed facility and provide evidence that
the requirements of Section 65915(i) have been met, thus entitling the project to
the requested density bonus.
Table 14.16.030-1
Summary of State Density Bonus Requirements
The state density bonus law is codified at California Government Code Section 65915. In
general, it requires the city to grant a density bonus, as well as certain concessions and
incentives, to qualifying residential development projects. The following chart provides a general
overview of the requirements:
Type of Units* % of
Dedicated
Units
Density
Bonus**
Concessions or
Incentives
Lower Income 10% 20% 1
(1.5% increase in density bonus for every 1% of dedicated
units over 10% threshold) (max 35% density bonus)
Type of Units* % of
Dedicated
Units
Density
Bonus**
Concessions or
Incentives
20% 35% 2
30% or above 35% 3
Very Low Income 5% 20% 1
(2.5% increase in density bonus for every 1% increase in dedicated
units over 5% threshold) (max 35% density bonus)
10% 33% 2
15% or above 35% 3
Moderate (condominium*** or planned
development only)****
10% 5% 1
(1% increase in density bonus for each 1% increase in dedicated
units over 10% threshold) (max 25% density bonus)
20% 15% 2
30% or above 25% 3
* Section 65915 applies only to proposed developments of five (5) or more units.
** Section 65915(g) defines a "density bonus" as "a density increase of at least 20 percent,
unless a lesser percentage is elected by the applicant, over the otherwise maximum allowable
residential density under the applicable zoning ordinance and land use element of the general
plan as of the date of the application by the applicant to the local government."
*** Pursuant to California Civil Code Section 1351, a "condominium project" means a
development consisting of condominiums. A condominium consists of an undivided interest in
common in a portion of real property coupled with a separate interest in space called a unit, the
boundaries of which are described on a recorded final map, parcel map, or condominium plan in
sufficient detail to locate all boundaries thereof. The area within these boundaries may be filled
with air, earth, or water, or any combination thereof, and need not be physically attached to
land, except by easements for access and, if necessary, support. The description of the unit
may refer to: (1) boundaries described in the recorded final map, parcel map, or condominium
plan, (2) physical boundaries, either in existence, or to be constructed, such as walls, floors, and
ceilings of a structure or any portion thereof, (3) an entire structure containing one or more units,
or (4) any combination thereof. The portion or portions of the real property held in undivided
interest may be all of the real properties, except for the separate interests, or may include a
particular three (3) dimensional portion thereof, the boundaries of which are described on a
recorded final map, parcel map, or condominium plan. The area within these boundaries may be
filled with air, earth, or water, or any combination thereof, and need not be physically attached to
land, except by easements for access and, if necessary, support. An individual condominium
within a condominium project may include, in addition, a separate interest in other portions of
the real property.
****Pursuant to California Civil Code Section 1351, a "planned development" means a
development (other than a community apartment project, a condominium project, or a stock
cooperative) having either or both of the following features: (1) the common area is owned
either by an association or in common by the owners of the separate interests who possess
appurtenant rights to the beneficial use and enjoyment of the common area; (2) a power exists
in the association to enforce an obligation of an owner of a separate interest with respect to the
beneficial use and enjoyment of the common area by means of an assessment which may
become a lien upon the separate interests in accordance with Section 1367 or 1367.1.
In addition, a developer/applicant can also qualify for a mandated density bonus in the following
situations:
Table 14.16.030-2
Summary of State Density Bonus Requirements
EXPAND
Project Threshold Density
Bonus
Concession or
Incentive
Senior Housing 35 units dedicated to senior housing as defined in Civil Code
Sections 51.3 and 51.12
20% 1
I.General Requirements—Nonresidential Development Projects.
1.Application. An affordable housing requirement is hereby imposed on all developers
of nonresidential development projects, including all construction of additional square
footage to existing nonresidential developments and conversion of residential square
footage to nonresidential use, subject to the following exceptions:
a.Any project involving new construction under five thousand (5,000) square feet;
b.Residential components of a mixed-use project, which shall be subject to
the requirements of subsection B of this section;
c.A mixed-use project where the number of affordable units equals or exceeds
the housing required by subsection (I)(2) of this section for the gross square
footage of nonresidential uses;
d.Projects where a building permit application has been accepted as complete by
the city prior to January 5, 2005; however, any extension or modification of such
approval or permit after such date shall not be exempt;
e.Projects that are the subject of development agreements in effect prior to
January 5, 2005 where such agreements specifically preclude the city
from requiring compliance with this type of affordable housing program;
f.Any nonresidential building that is damaged or destroyed by fire or other natural
catastrophe if the rebuilt square footage of the nonresidential portion of the
building does not increase upon reconstruction;
g.Project for which no nexus can be established between the proposed
nonresidential development and an increase in the demand
for affordable housing.
2.Number of Affordable Units Required. Proposed nonresidential development projects
shall provide twenty percent (20%) of the total number of residential units needed to
provide housing for project employees in very low, low and moderate income
households, as set forth in Table 14.16.030-3 of this section. Any decimal fraction
greater than 0.50 shall be interpreted as requiring one additional dwelling unit. For
uses not listed in Table 14.16.030-3 of this section, the community development
director shall determine the number of affordable units required based on
comparable employment densities to uses listed. In making such a determination,
the decision of the community development director shall be based on data
concerning anticipated employee density for the proposed project submitted by the
applicant, employment surveys or other research on similar uses submitted by the
applicant or independent research, and/or such other data the director determines
relevant.
Table 14.16.030-3
Number of New Very low, Low and Moderate
Income Units Required for New
Nonresidential Development
Development Type Number of New Very low, Low and Moderate Income Units
(per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area 1 )
Office 2 or Research and
Development uses
0.03
Retail, Restaurant or
Personal Service uses
0.0225
Development Type Number of New Very low, Low and Moderate Income Units
(per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area 1 )
Manufacturing or Light
Industrial uses
0.01625
Warehouse uses 0.00875
Hotel or motel uses 3 0.0075
1 Floor area excludes all areas permanently used for vehicle parking.
2 Includes professional, business and medical offices.
3 Accessory uses to a hotel or motel, such as restaurant, retail and meeting facilities shall be
subject to requirements for a retail use.
1. Provision of Units or In-lieu Fee. Required affordable housing units shall be provided
on the same site as the proposed nonresidential development, at an off-site location
within the city, through dedication of suitable real property for the required housing to
the city, or through payment of an in-lieu fee, at the discretion of the planning
commission or the city council. The planning commission or city council may accept
off-site units or an in-lieu fee if it is determined that inclusion of
the required housing units within the proposed nonresidential development is not
reasonable or appropriate, taking into consideration factors including, but not limited
to, overall project character, density, location, size, accessibility to public
transportation, and proximity to retail and service establishments; or where the
nature of the surrounding land uses is incompatible with residential uses in terms of
noise or other nuisances, health or safety hazards or concerns. Where the
application of the affordable housing requirement in Section 14.16.030.B Section
14.16.030.I.2 results in less than one (1) unit or one (1) or
more affordable housing unit and a fractional unit, the applicant may choose to pay
an in-lieu fee for the fractional unit without the required findings noted
above. Affordable housing units provided as part of the proposed nonresidential
development or at an off-site location shall meet the requirements of Section
14.16.030.B Sections 14.16.030.C, D, H and I and shall be completed prior to or
concurrent with the completion of construction of the proposed nonresidential
development, as the conditions of project approval shall specify.
2. Calculation and Payment of In-lieu Fee. The amounts and calculation of
the housing in-lieu fee shall be based on the formula set forth in Section 14.16.030.F
and established by resolution of the city council, as amended from time to time.
Unless otherwise preempted by law, or otherwise approved by the planning
commission or city council, the in-lieu fee shall be paid prior to the issuance of a
building permit for the proposed project.
J.Housing In-Lieu Fee Fund. The housing in-lieu fees shall be placed in a segregated
citywide housing in-lieu fee account. The funds in the housing in-lieu fee account, along with
any interest earnings accumulated thereon, shall be used solely to increase and expand the
supply of housing affordable to very low, low and moderate income households, including,
but not limited to, the following:
1.Design and construction of housing affordable to households of very low, low and
moderate income households, including costs associated with planning,
administration and design;
2.Acquisition of property and property rights, including acquisition of
existing housing units and the provision of long-term affordability covenants on those
units;
3.Other actions that would increase the supply of housing affordable to very low, low
and moderate income households;
4.Costs of program development and ongoing administration of the housing fund
program;
5.Expenditures from the housing in-lieu fee fund shall be authorized solely by the city
council and controlled and paid in accordance with general city budgetary policies.
K.Enforcement. The city attorney is authorized to abate violations and to enforce the
provisions of this section and all implementing regulatory agreements and resale controls
placed on affordable housing units, by civil action, injunctive relief, and/or other proceeding
or method permitted by law.
The remedies provided for herein shall be cumulative and not exclusive and shall not preclude
the city from other remedy or relief to which it otherwise would be entitled under law or equity.
RESOLUTION No. _________
RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING “GUIDELINES FOR
THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING REQUIREMENT PROGRAM”
WHEREAS, Section 14.03.030 of the San Rafael Municipal Code requires residential
development projects to enhance the public welfare and ensure that further residential development projects
within the city contribute to the attainment of affordable housing goals and requirements by promoting and
increasing, through actual construction and/or alternative equivalent actions; and
WHEREAS, on August 20, 2018, the City Council held a duly noticed public meeting and was
presented a comprehensive information report on housing topics and issues, accepting all public testimony
and the written report of the Community Development Department; and
WHEREAS, on September 3, 2019, the City Council held a duly noticed public meeting and was
presented a comprehensive information report challenges to housing development, accepting all public
testimony and the written report of the Community Development Department. Staff was directed to conduct
public housing workshops on proposed policies to address challenges to approving and developing housing
to gain a better understanding of the public’s view on the housing crisis, as well as, to get feedback on the
prioritization of the proposed policy actions; and
WHEREAS, on January 21, 2020, the City Council held a duly noticed public meeting and was
presented a comprehensive information report outlining the findings of the public housing workshops and
recommendations for prioritization, timing, and future City Council actions on proposed policy actions to
address challenges to approving and developing housing, accepting all public testimony and the written
report of the Community Development Department. Staff was directed to return with an updated
informational report on potential amendments to the SRMC aimed at encouraging housing development
and streamlining approvals; and
WHEREAS, on August 11, 2020, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public meeting
and was presented a comprehensive information report analyzing potential amendments to the SRMC
resulting from the January 21, 2020 City Council direction, accepting all public testimony and the written
report of the Community Development Department and providing feedback for City Council consideration
of potential amendments to the SRMC aimed at encouraging housing development and streamlining
approvals; and
WHEREAS, on September 8, 2020 and September 21, 2020, the City Council held a duly-noticed
public hearings on the proposed amendments to the SRMC Title 14, accepting all public testimony and the
written report of the Community Development Department, and directing staff to prepare amendments to
SRMC Title 14 for the Planning Commission to provide a recommendation; and
WHEREAS, on November 17, 2020, the Planning Commission, reviewed the proposed
amendments to SRMC Title 14, including revisions to the affordable housing requirement, density bonus
and height bonus provisions, limitations for residential development of small lots, appeal scheduling
process, and review requirements for hillside development exceptions; and
WHEREAS, the amendments to the San Rafael Municipal Code Title 14 do not propose any
changes to City policies or regulations that would result in a direct or indirect physical, environmental
impact; therefore it has been determined that this ordinance amendment qualifies for exemption pursuant
to Sections 15183(a) because it entails a project that can be found consistent with the General Plan policies
and pursuant to 15061(b)(3), which states that as a ‘general rule’ the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) applies only to projects which have the potential to cause a significant, physical environmental;
and
WHEREAS, the San Rafael City Council finds it necessary to establish guidelines which
establish priorities, criteria, and administrative processes for administration of the Affordable Housing
Requirement program;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of San
Rafael hereby adopts the following “Guidelines for the Administration of the Affordable
Housing Trust Fund”:
The purpose of these Guidelines is to enhance the public welfare and ensure that further residential
development projects within the city contribute to the attainment of affordable housing goals and
requirements by promoting and increasing, through actual construction and/or alternative equivalent actions
as provided for in this section, the development of rental and ownership housing units for very low, low
and moderate income households.
A. Definitions. Please refer to SRMC Chapter 14.03.030.
B. Affordable Housing Requirements. Residential development projects between two (2) and fifteen (15)
units shall meet only the Primary Requirement. Residential development project greater than fifteen
(15) units shall meet both the Primary Requirement and Secondary Requirement. Primary and
Secondary Requirements are described below:
1. Primary Requirement. All Residential development projects shall provide affordable housing
units as follows:
Project Size Percentage of Affordable Housing Units
2—15 Housing Units* 10% of the units must be affordable to and occupied by a low-
income household
15 or more Housing Units* 5% of the units must be affordable to and occupied by a low-
income household
* See exemptions listed in subsection (B)(1) of this section.
2. Secondary Requirement. Residential development projects greater than fifteen (15) units shall
satisfy the Secondary Requirement through any of the following alternate means:
a. Additional On-Site Affordable Units. A developer may comply with this section through
one of the follow alternate means:
i. 5% of the units, in addition to units provided through Section B.1, must affordable to
and occupied by a low-income household;
ii. 10% of the units, in addition to units provided through Section B.1, must affordable
to and occupied by a moderate-income household.
b. In -Lieu Fees for Residential Development. A developer may comply with this section by
paying an in-lieu fee equivalent to five percentage (5%) of the total project units.
The amounts and calculation of the housing in-lieu fee shall be established by resolution
of the city council as amended from time to time. Unless otherwise preempted by law or
as otherwise approved by the planning commission or city council, the in-lieu fee shall be
paid prior to the issuance of a building permit for the proposed project.
c. Off-Site Affordable Units. Provision of affordable units off-site must be approved by the
Community Development Director and meet all of the following criteria1:
i. Off-site affordable units must be provided within ½ mile of the market-rate project.
ii. Partnership with an experienced affordable housing developer.
iii. The off-site affordable units must provide at least the level of public benefit (number
of affordable units (rounded up to the next whole unit); comparable or larger unit
bedroom sizes; income levels served; term of affordability) as would have been
provided through on-site compliance described in Section A.2.a;
iv. The developer must make a meaningful contribution to the offsite affordable units.
v. The developer provides the City with a cash deposit or equivalent guarantee of the
amount the project would be required to contribute through a cash in-lieu fees
contribution as described in Section A.2.b until there is a construction financing
closing on the off-site units.
d. Donation of Land to the City. The Community Development Director may choose to accept
the donation of land to the City as a means of alternative compliance with this policy if,
after appropriate due diligence, it is determined that the land is desirable for the production
of affordable housing and all of the following criteria as determined by the Community
Development Director are met:
i. The land is appraised by the City at a value equal to or greater than the in-lieu fee
parameters in effect at the date of land use application. If the appraised value is less
than the in-lieu fee, developers may contribute the remaining requirement in a cash
fee.
ii. Located in an area where there is high need for sites for affordable housing. (i.e., areas
where the City does not control sufficient development sites)
iii. Reasonably developable for affordable housing (including zoned for residential
development).
3. Fractional Units. Where the required percentage of affordable housing units results in a
fractional unit, or a combination of affordable housing units and fractional units, the developer
shall provide the following:
a. Pay an in-lieu fee for the fractional unit below 0.5 unit;
b. Construct the next higher whole number of affordable housing units for a fractional unit
0.5 and above;
1 The Community Development Director may, under extraordinary circumstances, recommend an off -site project
outside these defined parameters.
C. Location and Type of Affordable Housing Units. Affordable housing units shall be dispersed
throughout the residential development project. Units may be clustered within the residential project
when the city determines that such clustering furthers affordable housing opportunities. The affordable
housing units shall be of a similar mix and type to that of the residential development project as a whole,
including, but not limited to:
1. The same or substantially similar mix of unit size (e.g., number of bedrooms, square footage);
2. Compatibility with the design, materials, amenities, and appearance of the other developed
units.
D. Timing of Construction. All affordable housing units shall be constructed prior to or concurrent with
the construction of market rate housing units unless the city council, in its sole discretion, determines
an alternative construction schedule will further the goal of affordable housing in the city.
E. Initial Occupancy, Control of Resale and Continued Affordability of Affordable Housing Units in
Residential Development Projects. Prior to the issuance of certificates of occupancy or the final
inspection for any units in a qualifying project, all regulatory agreements and, if the affordable housing
units are owner-occupied, resale restrictions, deeds of trust, and/or other documents as may be required
and approved by the city council, shall be recorded by the city, or its agent, against all parcels having
such affordable housing units and shall be effective in perpetuity; except that, in its sole discretion and
upon a finding of financial need or infeasibility, the city council may reduce the affordability time frame
to not less than forty (40) years.
1. Ownership Units. Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, the following conditions
and/or restrictions shall apply to housing units developed for ownership:
a. The maximum sales price permitted for resale of an affordable housing unit intended for
owner-occupancy shall be limited to the amount provided in the resale restrictions and
option to purchase agreement between the owner of the affordable unit and the city or its
designee, entered into prior to issuance of any building permits for the project.
b. The city shall have first right to purchase, or assign its right to purchase, such affordable
unit(s) at the maximum price that could be charged to an eligible household, as set forth in
the resale restrictions and option to purchase agreement between the owner and the city or
its designee.
No purchase and/or sale transaction(s) for owner occupied affordable housing units shall
be permitted without express approval by the city or its designee of the purchasing
household's eligibility. Nothing in this section shall prohibit the sale and/or purchase of an
owner-occupied affordable housing unit if the city fails to make a determination of
household eligibility within the time or other limits provided by the regulatory agreements
or resale restrictions.
2. Rental Units. The owner of a property developed for rental occupancy under the provisions of
this section ("the property owner"), or the property owner's designee, shall be responsible for
selecting qualified tenants pursuant to the regulatory agreement entered into by and between
the property owner and the city. The property owner or the designee shall provide annual
reports to the city or its designee containing information on the rent charged for
the affordable unit and the tenant eligibility as set forth in the regulatory agreement.
F. Administration.
1. Annual Reporting. The Community Development Department shall make available to the City
Council an annual report on the Affordable Housing Requirements which measures the
effectiveness of the program. These effectiveness metrics may include, but are not limited to:
a. Units in the housing developing pipeline and project status;
b. Number of units built for low-income and moderate-income households;
c. In-lieu fees revenues collected into housing trust fund;
d. Units funded through housing trust fund.
2. Program Review: The Director will provide the City Council with a comprehensive review of
the Affordable Housing Requirements and whether any changes should be considered within
18 months of its effective date and every 3-5 years thereafter.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that any and all amendments to this Resolution as deemed
necessary from time-to-time shall be adopted by resolution of the City Council.
I, Lindsay Lara, Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the forgoing resolution was adopted
as a regular meeting of the City Council on the _____ day of December 2020.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
_______________________________________
LINDSAY LARA, City Clerk
RESOLUTION No. ____________
RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING DENSITY BONUS AND
INCENTIVES APPLICABLE TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS THAT QUALIFY FOR A
DENSITY BONUS AS SET FORTH IN SAN RAFAEL MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 14.16.030
WHEREAS, the City’s Density Bonus regulations, set forth in San Rafael Municipal Code Section 14.16.030
Affordable housing establishing eligibility criteria, review procedures and allowable density bonuses,
concessions/incentives, and waivers/reductions of development standards; and
WHEREAS, San Rafael Municipal Code Section 14.16.030 Affordable housing said section was last
amended in 2010; and
WHEREAS, over the past 10 years there have been a number of changes to State Density Bonus Law
(SDBL) as set forth in Government Code Section 65915 that are meant to encourage development of affordable
housing and/or remove barriers to housing in general; and
WHEREAS, some of the provisions outlined in SRMC section 14.16.030 no longer align with Government
Code Section 65915 in that the percentage of density bonus and number of concession and incentives have been
modified by the State; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted Amendments to Section 14.16.030 which sets forth the City’s
intent to comply with State Density Bonus Law and references this resolutions document setting forth the City’s
Density Bonus Regulations; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to provide clarity in the applicability of SDBL and flexibility in amending the
density bonus regulations as may be required from time to time due to changes by the State Legislature.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby adopts the following Density
Bonus and Incentives Regulations
A. Purpose: In accordance with, Government Code Section 65915 ( also known as State Density Bonus
Law) and to avoid any undue economic burden or cost to the applicant providing affordable units required
by the city, residential development projects of five (5) or more units are eligible for a state density bonus
and other concession, incentives and/or waivers and reductions of development standards, if eligible, in
accordance with the following:
B. Density Bonus. A density bonus means a density increase over the otherwise maximum allowable gross
residential density as of the date of application. A density bonus may also be a lesser percentage of density
increase, including, but not limited to, no increase in density. When calculating a density bonus any
calculation resulting in a fractional unit shall be rounded to the next larger whole number. This rounding
shall apply to the base density, required affordable unit, and any density bonus unit. Eligible projects
defined in Section C below shall be allowed a Density Bonus equal to the allowable percentages set forth
in Table 3 of this Resolution.
C. Eligible Projects – unless a project is otherwise ineligible for a density bonus as specified in Section D
below, the following projects are eligible for a density bonus:
a. Projects that provide at affordable housing units at the minimum levels of affordability as listed in
Government Code Section 65915 and as set forth in Table 3 of this City Council Resolution. The
amount of density bonus shall as specified in that table.
i. An applicant shall agree to, continued affordability of all very low and low-income rental
units that qualified the applicant for the award of the density bonus for at least 55 years.
b. One hundred percent (100%) affordable housing projects that meet the criteria listed under
Government Code Section 65915(b)(1)(G) and as described below shall be eligible for a density
bonus listed under 2. below:
i. All units must be for lower income households except:
1. Does not apply to managers unit
2. Up to 20 percent may be for moderate-income households,
ii. An applicant shall agree to continued affordability for at least 55 years
iii. If the 100% affordable housing development is located within one-half mile of a major
transit stop, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code,
the applicant shall choose one of the following density bonuses:
1. Waivers or Concessions as specified in Table 4 of this City Council Resolution;
OR
2. No maximum controls on density.
c. Projects that provide housing for transitional foster youth, as defined in Section 66025.9 of the
Education Code, disabled veterans, as defined in Section 18541, or homeless persons, as defined in
the federal McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. Sec. 11301 et seq.). The
amount of Density bonus shall be as specified in Table 3 of this City Council Resolution and shall
apply to projects that also meet the following criteria:
i. shall be subject to a recorded affordability restriction of 55 years
ii. shall be provided at the same affordability level as very low income units.
d. Qualified Student Housing - qualified student housing development shall be one that meets the
following criteria
i. At least 20% units are for lower income students as follows:
1. The rent available to lower income students shall be calculated at 30 percent of 65
percent of the area median income for a single-room occupancy unit type.
ii. The development will provide priority for the applicable affordable units for lower income
students experiencing homelessness. Verification of such shall be made by a local
homeless service provider, or institution of higher education that has knowledge of a
person’s homeless status.
iii. All units in the student housing development will be used exclusively for undergraduate,
graduate, or professional students enrolled full time at an institution of higher education
accredited by the Western Association of Schools and Colleges or the Accrediting
Commission for Community and Junior Colleges.
iv. Units shall be subject to a recorded affordability restriction of 55 years.
v. PRIOR TO CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY APPLICANT/PROJECT proponent shall
provide evidence that the applicant/project proponent has entered into an operating
agreement or master lease with one or more qualifying institution to occupy all units of the
student housing development with students from that institution(s).
vi. For purposes of calculating a density bonus granted pursuant to this subparagraph, the
term “unit” as used in this section means one rental bed and its pro rata share of associated
common area facilities
e. Senior Housing - A qualified senior housing development shall be A senior citizen housing
development, as defined in Sections 51.3 and 51.12 of the Civil Code, or a mobilehome park that
limits residency based on age requirements for housing for older persons pursuant to Section
798.76 or 799.5 of the Civil Code
f. Child Care Facilities- for projects that include a childcare facility, an applicant shall be eligible for
density bonus if an applicant proposes to construct child care facility meeting the criteria in section
(i)
i. Eligible child care facility
1. Will be located on the premises of, as part of, or adjacent to a proposed housing
development
2. The childcare facility shall remain in operation for a period of time that is as long
as or longer than the period of time during which the density bonus units are
required to remain affordable
3. Of the children who attend the childcare facility, the children of very low income
households, lower income households, or families of moderate income shall equal
a percentage that is equal to or greater than the percentage of dwelling units that
are required for very low income households, lower income households, or
families of moderate income
4. “Child care facility” as used in this section, means a child daycare facility (other
than a family daycare home) including, but not limited to, infant centers,
preschools, extended daycare facilities, and school-age childcare centers
ii. Amount of Density Bonus- an allowable density bonus shall be one the following:
1. An additional density bonus that is in an amount of square feet of residential space
that is equal to or greater than the amount of square feet in the child care facility.
2. An additional concession or incentive designated by the City that contributes
significantly to the economic feasibility of the construction of the child care
facility.
g. Land Donations
i. The applicant donates and transfers the land no later than the date of approval of the final
subdivision map, parcel map, or residential development application
ii. The developable acreage and zoning classification of the land being transferred are
sufficient to permit construction of units affordable to very low income households in an
amount not less than 10 percent of the number of residential units of the proposed
development.
iii. The transferred land is at least one acre in size or of sufficient size to permit development
of at least 40 units, has the appropriate general plan designation, is appropriately zoned
with appropriate development standards for development at the density described in
paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 65583.2, and is or will be served by adequate
public facilities and infrastructure.
iv. The transferred land shall have all of the permits and approvals, other than building
permits, necessary for the development of the very low income housing units on the
transferred land, not later than the date of approval of the final subdivision map, parcel
map, or residential development application
v. The transferred land and the affordable units shall be subject to a deed restriction ensuring
continued affordability of the units for a at least 55 years from the time of development of
the transferred property
vi. The land shall be transferred to the local agency or to a housing developer approved by the
local agency. The local agency may require the applicant to identify and transfer the land
to the developer.
vii. The transferred land shall be within the boundary of the proposed development or, if the
local agency agrees, within one-quarter mile of the boundary of the proposed
development.
viii. A proposed source of funding for the very low income units shall be identified not later
than the date of approval of the final subdivision map, parcel map, or residential
development application.
h. Commercial Projects that partner with a qualified affordable housing project. When an applicant
for approval of a commercial development has entered into an agreement for partnered housing as
described below to contribute affordable housing through a joint project or two separate projects
encompassing affordable housing, the city, shall grant the commercial developer a development
bonus listed in below. Housing shall be constructed on the site of the commercial development or
on a site that meets the following criteria:
i. Eligible site
1. Is located within the city limits
2. The commercial developer may directly build the units; may donate a portion of
the site or property elsewhere to the affordable housing developer for use as a site
for affordable housing; or may make a cash payment to the affordable housing
developer that shall be used towards the costs of constructing the affordable
housing project.
3. At least 30 percent of the affordable housing units shall be for low-income
households or at least 15 percent of the total units for very low-income
households.
4. Is located in close proximity to public amenities including schools and
employment centers
5. Located within one-half mile of a major transit stop, as defined in subdivision (b)
of Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code.
ii. Development Bonus
1. Up to a 20-percent increase in maximum allowable intensity in the General Plan.
2. Up to a 20-percent increase in maximum allowable floor area ratio
3. Up to a 20-percent increase in maximum height requirements.
4. Up to a 20-percent reduction in minimum parking requirements.
5. Use of a limited-use/limited-application elevator for upper floor accessibility.
6. An exception to a zoning ordinance or other land use regulation.
7. Nothing in this section shall preclude an affordable housing developer from
seeking a density bonus, concessions or incentives, waivers or reductions of
development standards, or parking ratios under allowed under Section 65915.
8. A development bonus pursuant to this section shall not include a reduction or
waiver of the requirements within an ordinance that requires the payment of a fee
by a commercial developer for the promotion or provision of affordable housing.
D. In-Eligible Projects The following projects shall not be eligible for a Density Bonus
An applicant shall be ineligible for a density bonus, development bonus, or any other incentives or
concessions if the project is proposed on any property that includes a parcel or parcels on which rental
dwelling units are or, (if the dwelling units have been vacated or demolished in the five-year period
preceding the application), have been subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents
to levels affordable to persons and families of lower or very low income; subject to any other form of rent
or price control or occupied by lower or very low income households, unless the proposed housing
development replaces those units, and either of the following applies:
i. The proposed housing development, inclusive of the units replaced pursuant to this
paragraph, contains affordable units at minimum percentages set forth in subdivision C.a.
ii. Each unit in the development, exclusive of a manager’s unit or units, is affordable to, and
occupied by, either a lower or very low income household.
E. Amount of Density Bonus. The amount of density bonus shall be as specified in Table 3 of this City
Council resolution (see Exhibit 1). The applicant may request a lesser density bonus, however, the city
shall not be required to similarly reduce the number of units required to be dedicated for affordable
housing. In calculating the density bonus for a project, each project shall be entitled to only one density
bonus to be selected from the categories in Table 3 of this City Council Resolution. Density bonuses from
more than one income category may not be combined.
F. Concession or Incentives. Concession or incentive shall mean any reduction in site development
standards or any modification of zoning or architectural design requirements necessary pursuant to
California Government Code Section 65915(d)(3) or 65915(e) that would result in identifiable and actual
cost reductions, and facilitate the construction of the residential development project at the densities
provided for in Section 65915. Eligible projects as defined in Section C above shall be allowed the
number of concessions set forth in Table 4 of this Resolution (see Exhibit 2). The following
concessions/incentives are not required to demonstrate identifiable and actual cost reductions:
a. Parking concessions shown in Tables 1 and 2
b. Waiver of planning and building fees subject to city council Resolution 11025.
c. Height bonuses, as identified and listed in Exhibit 10 of the General Plan 2020 Land Use Element
d. Twenty percent (20%) reduction in the require yard setback, lot coverage, or landscape
requirement. Each reduction shall count as one concession.
G. Waivers or Reduction of Development Standards. A housing development is eligible for a waiver or
reduction of any development standard that physically precludes the construction of an affordable
housing development at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted by this section. The
applicant shall submit the documents outlined in section J. as well as any additional documents needed to
demonstrate how the development standards would impede development of the project. There is no limit
to the number of waivers or reductions requested. A waiver or reduction shall neither reduce nor increase
the number of incentives or concessions to which the applicant is entitled.
H. Waiver of planning and building fees. An applicant for an affordable housing development may request
a waiver of planning fees pursuant to city council Resolution 11025.
I. Parking Concessions. The maximum parking standards, inclusive of handicapped and guest parking, shall
apply to the entire project as follows:
TABLE 1
MAXIMUM PARKING RATIOS*
FOR
AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS
UNIT TYPE # OF SPACES PER UNIT**
Studio 1
1 Bedroom 1
2 bedrooms 2
3 + bedrooms 2
*Exception: Residential development projects in the downtown zoning districts which do
not qualify for parking ratios in Table 2 below shall comply with the parking requirements
set forth in Sections 14.18.040 and 14.04.060 of this title.
** fractional units shall be rounded up.
TABLE 2
MAXIMUM PARKING RATIOS
FOR
SPECIAL PROJECTS NEAR TRANSIT
WITH PARATRANSIT
SERVICE OR ACCESSIBLE
BUS ROUTE *
WITHIN 1/2 MILE OF
MAJOR TRANSIT STOP**
# OF SPACES REQUIRED
Rental/for sale projects with at
least 11% very low income or
20% lower income units
0.5 spaces per bedroom
Rental senior projects 100%
affordable to lower income
Rental projects 100% affordable
to lower income
0.5 spaces per unit
Rental senior projects 100%
affordable to lower income
0.5 spaces per unit
Rental special needs projects
100% affordable to lower
income households
Rental supportive housing
developments 100% affordable
to lower income households
0 spaces per unit
* Bus routes operating at least 8 routes per day
**Major Transit Stop as defined herein
J. Application for a Density Bonus and/or Concessions or Incentives for Residential Development
Projects. Application for a Density Bonus shall be done in the following manner:
a. Request for a Density Bonus and/or request for concessions or incentives for a residential project
shall be made by filing a separate application along with the following information:
i. Density Bonus Application
ii. Density Bonus submittal checklist: This checklist shall include, but not be limited to the
following information: Property location; lot size, zoning allowable residential density,
and allowable number of base units.
iii. Density Bonus eligibility table: This table shall include: the Number of market rate units
in the project; the number of affordable housing units proposed & level of affordability for
each of the designated affordable units; the number of other eligible units (senior housing,
supportive housing, etc); number of density bonus units requested; total allowable density
bonus (see Table 3 of this City Council Resolution)
iv. Project plans showing the total number of units, the number and location of the affordable
units and the number and location of the proposed density bonus units;
v. Parking Ratios Table: this table shall include the total number of proposed parking and the
total number of required parking spaces for affordable housing units or for special projects
as shown in Tables 1 and 2. above;
vi. List of requested Concessions/Incentives: The application shall include the total number of
concessions or incentives being requested; the total number of concessions or incentives
for which the project is eligible for by this City Council Resolution Table 4; a list of the
requested concessions or Incentives; written financial documentation that demonstrates
how the requested concessions/incentives result in identifiable and actual cost reductions.
The written statement shall include the actual cost reduction achieved through the
concession/incentive and evidence that the concession/incentive allows the applicant to
develop affordable housing at the specified affordable rents/sales price; The cost of
reviewing any required financial data submitted as part of the application in support of a
request for a concession or incentive, including, but not limited to, the cost to the city of
hiring a consultant to review said data, shall be borne by the applicant
vii. A list of requested waivers or reduction of development standards. Any request for
waivers or reduction of development standards shall be accompanied with evidence that
the development standards for which a waiver is requested would have the effect of
physically precluding the construction of a development at the densities or with the
concessions or incentives permitted by Government Code Section 65915.
viii. If a density bonus is requested for a qualified land donation, the application shall show the
location of the land to be dedicated and provide evidence that the requirements of Section
C.g. have been met, thus entitling the project to the requested density bonus;
ix. If a density bonus is requested for construction of a child care facility the application shall
show the location and square footage of the proposed facility and provide evidence that
the requirements of Section C.f. above have been met, thus entitling the project to the
requested density bonus.
b. Completeness Review. Within 30 days of submitting a density bonus application, the City shall
notify the applicant of their maximum allowable density bonus and the maximum number of
concessions/incentives. In addition, the applicant shall be notified of any additional information
needed to justify the requested density bonus, concessions/incentives and any requested waiver or
reduction of development standards.
c. Procedures and timelines for processing. The review process for a density bonus project shall be
the same as that required for associated discretionary permits. Discretionary actions on density
bonus projects shall be subject to the same appeal process applied to associated discretionary
permits.
K. Findings for Denial of Concessions or Incentives. The Decision making body shall not approve a
concession or incentive if it makes any of the following findings, in writing and supported by substantial
evidence:
a. The concession or incentive does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions to provide for
affordable rents or affordable ownership costs.
b. The waiver or reduction would have a specific, adverse impact, on upon health, safety, or the
physical environment, and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid
the specific adverse impact.
c. would have an adverse impact on any real property that is listed in the California Register of
Historical Resources, or
d. The grant of a waiver or reduction would be conflict with state or federal law.
L. Findings for Denial of a Waiver or Reduction of Development Standards. The Decision making body
shall not approve a waiver or reduction of development standards if:
a. The development standard for which a waiver is requested would not physically preclude the
construction of the housing development with the density bonus and incentives permitted by this
City Council Resolution.
b. The waiver or reduction would have a specific, adverse impact, on upon health, safety, or the
physical environment, and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid
the specific adverse impact.
c. The waiver or reduction of development standards would have an adverse impact on any real
property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, or
d. The grant of a waiver or reduction would be conflict with state or federal law.
e. The applicant has requested and will receive a waiver from maximum controls on density as
provide in Section C.b. above.
M. Definitions
“Condominium Project” Pursuant to California Civil Code Section 1351, a "condominium project" means
a development consisting of condominiums. A condominium consists of an undivided interest in common
in a portion of real property coupled with a separate interest in space called a unit, the boundaries of which
are described on a recorded final map, parcel map, or condominium plan in sufficient detail to locate all
boundaries thereof. The area within these boundaries may be filled with air, earth, or water, or any
combination thereof, and need not be physically attached to land, except by easements for access and, if
necessary, support. The description of the unit may refer to: (1) boundaries described in the recorded final
map, parcel map, or condominium plan, (2) physical boundaries, either in existence, or to be constructed,
such as walls, floors, and ceilings of a structure or any portion thereof, (3) an entire structure containing
one or more units, or (4) any combination thereof. The portion or portions of the real property held in
undivided interest may be all of the real properties, except for the separate interests, or may include a
particular three (3) dimensional portion thereof, the boundaries of which are described on a recorded final
map, parcel map, or condominium plan. The area within these boundaries may be filled with air, earth, or
water, or any combination thereof, and need not be physically attached to land, except by easements for
access and, if necessary, support. An individual condominium within a condominium project may include,
in addition, a separate interest in other portions of the real property.
“planned development” Pursuant to California Civil Code Section 1351, a "planned development" means a
development (other than a community apartment project, a condominium project, or a stock cooperative)
having either or both of the following features: (1) the common area is owned either by an association or in
common by the owners of the separate interests who possess appurtenant rights to the beneficial use and
enjoyment of the common area; (2) a power exists in the association to enforce an obligation of an owner
of a separate interest with respect to the beneficial use and enjoyment of the common area by means of an
assessment which may become a lien upon the separate interests in accordance with Section 1367 or
1367.1.
“Major Transit Stop” means a site containing any of the following:
(a) An existing rail or bus rapid transit station.
(b) A ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service.
(c) The intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or
less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods.
A project shall be considered to be within one-half mile of a major transit stop if all parcels within the
project have no more than 25 percent of their area farther than one-half mile from the stop or corridor and
if not more than 10 percent of the residential units or 100 units, whichever is less, in the project are farther
than one-half mile from the stop or corridor.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that any and all amendments to this Resolution as deemed necessary from
time-to-time shall be adopted by resolution of the City Council.
I, Lindsay Lara, Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the forgoing resolution was adopted as a
regular meeting of the City Council on the _____ day of December 2020.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
_______________________________________
LINDSAY LARA, City Clerk
EXHIBITS
1. TABLE 1 -Percent allowable Density Bonus by Type of Project
2. TABLE 2- Allowable Concessions and Waivers
PERCENT OF
UNITS
DEDICATED AS
AFFORDABLE
UNITS
1. EXTREMELY
LOW OR VERY
LOW INCOME
UNITS
2. LOWER
INCOME
UNITS
3. MODERATE
INCOME2.
UNITS
4. QUALIFIED
LAND
DONATION
5. QUALIFIED
SUPPORTIVE
HOUSING
6. QUALIFIED
COLLEGE
STUDENT
HOUSING
7. DENISTY
BONUS
FOR
ALL SENIOR
HOUSING 3
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20%
TABLE 3
PERCENT ALLOWABLE DENSITY BONUS BY TYPE OF PROJECT
16%50%29.00%11%21%20%0 20%
15%50%27.50%10%20%20%0 20%
0 20%
14%46.25%26%9%19%20%0
13%42.50%24.50%8%18%20%
20%
12%38.75%23%7%17%20%0 20%
11%35%21.50%6%16%20%0 20%
0 20%
10%32.50%20%5%15%20%0
9%30%0 0 0 0
20%
8%27.50%0 0 0 0 0 20%
7%25%0 0 0 0 0 20%
0 20%
6%22.50%0 0 0 0 0
5%20%0 0 0 0
20%
PERCENT OF
UNITS
DEDICATED AS
AFFORDABLE
UNITS
1. EXTREMELY
LOW OR VERY
LOW INCOME
UNITS
2. LOWER
INCOME
UNITS
3. MODERATE
INCOME2.
UNITS
4. QUALIFIED
LAND
DONATION
5. QUALIFIED
SUPPORTIVE
HOUSING
6. QUALIFIED
COLLEGE
STUDENT
HOUSING
7. DENISTY
BONUS
FOR
ALL SENIOR
HOUSING 3
TABLE 3
PERCENT ALLOWABLE DENSITY BONUS BY TYPE OF PROJECT
28%50%50%23%33%20%35%20%
27%50%50%22%32%20%35%20%
35%20%
26%50%50%21%31%20%35%
25%50%50%20%30%20%
20%
24%50%50%19%29%20%35%20%
23%50%46%18%28%20%35%20%
35%20%
22%50%42%17%27%20%35%
21%50%38%16%26%20%
20%
20%50%35%15%25%20%35%20%
19%50%33.50%14%24%20%0 20%
0 20%
18%50%32%13%23%20%0
17%50%30.50%12%22%20%
20%
16%50%29.00%11%21%20%0 20%
PERCENT OF
UNITS
DEDICATED AS
AFFORDABLE
UNITS
1. EXTREMELY
LOW OR VERY
LOW INCOME
UNITS
2. LOWER
INCOME
UNITS
3. MODERATE
INCOME2.
UNITS
4. QUALIFIED
LAND
DONATION
5. QUALIFIED
SUPPORTIVE
HOUSING
6. QUALIFIED
COLLEGE
STUDENT
HOUSING
7. DENISTY
BONUS
FOR
ALL SENIOR
HOUSING 3
TABLE 3
PERCENT ALLOWABLE DENSITY BONUS BY TYPE OF PROJECT
40%50%50%35%35%20%35%20%
39%50%50%34%35%20%35%20%
35%20%
38%50%50%33%35%20%35%
37%50%50%32%35%20%
20%
36%50%50%31%35%20%35%20%
35%50%50%30%35%20%35%20%
35%20%
34%50%50%29%35%20%35%
33%50%50%28%35%20%
20%
32%50%50%27%35%20%35%20%
31%50%50%26%35%20%35%20%
35%20%
30%50%50%25%35%20%35%
29%50%50%24%34%20%
20%
28%50%50%23%33%20%35%20%
PERCENT OF
UNITS
DEDICATED AS
AFFORDABLE
UNITS
1. EXTREMELY
LOW OR VERY
LOW INCOME
UNITS
2. LOWER
INCOME
UNITS
3. MODERATE
INCOME2.
UNITS
4. QUALIFIED
LAND
DONATION
5. QUALIFIED
SUPPORTIVE
HOUSING
6. QUALIFIED
COLLEGE
STUDENT
HOUSING
7. DENISTY
BONUS
FOR
ALL SENIOR
HOUSING 3
TABLE 3
PERCENT ALLOWABLE DENSITY BONUS BY TYPE OF PROJECT
2. Moderate income density bonus applies to for sale units, not to rental units.
An applicant who requests a density bonus shall elect the basis of the bonus based on one of the categories (1-6) in this table.
The Denisity Bonus for Senior housing (7) may be agregated with a density bonus for categories 1-6 based on level of affordability
1. Applies when 100% of the total units (other than manager’s units) are restricted to very low, lower and moderate income (maximum 20% moderate).
20%
20%
35%
35%
35%
35%
20%
20%
20%
35%20%
43%50%50%46.25%
44% or greater 50%50%50%
35%20%
42%
3. senior housing developments are not obligated to the affordability requirements. Affordable senior units would be offered an additional density
bonus in line with this table
1. If the housing development is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 21155 of the Public
Resources Code, the city, county, or city and county shall not impose any maximum controls on density.
100%1 80%80%80%35%20%
50%50%42.50%35%35%20%
41%50%50%38.75%35%20%
40%50%50%35%35%20%35%20%
NUMBER OF
ALLOWABLE
INCENTIVES/
CONCESSIONS
ADDITIONAL
INCENTIVES IF
WITHIN 1/2 MILE OF
TRANSIT STOP
ALLOWABLE
WAIVERS OR
REDUCTIONS IN
DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS
Extremely low/Very
Low Lower Income
Moderate Income
(if part of a common
interest property) -NO MAXIMUM
5%10%10%1 -NO MAXIMUM
10%20%20%2 -NO MAXIMUM
15%30%30%3 -NO MAXIMUM
100%100%100% **4 *
height bonus of up
33 feet.NO MAXIMUM
** includes rental or for sale
TABLE 4
ALLOWABLE CONCESSIONS/INCENTIVES
OR WAIVERS/REDUCTIONS IN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
BY LEVEL OF AFFORDABILITY
AFFORDABILITY RATE
* only applies to project when no more than the 20% affordable units are at
moderate income rates
September 4, 2020
Honorable Mayor Phillips and City Council members
City of San Rafael
1400 Fifth Ave. Room 203
San Rafael, CA. 94901
CITY COUNCIL Hearing for Tuesday, Sept 8
Agenda Item 5.a: Measures to Facilitate Housing Development & Streamline Approvals -
Comments on proposed changes to the Design Review Board and Hillside Exception Approval
Honorable Mayor Phillips and City Council members:
We are a group of civically engaged residents that live on a hillside in San Rafael that includes Fremont
Rd, Upper Fremont Drive, and Marquard Ave (aka Moore Hill) in the West End neighborhood. We are
concerned about changes proposed by the Community Development Department that, if adopted, will
directly impact future development on our hillsides. We think our surrounding hillsides present
significant challenges for the development of remaining infill lots, including 1 acre on Upper Fremont
Drive and 5.5 acres on Dunand Court, as well as much smaller lots with slopes exceeding 80%. Your
decision to reduce (aka “streamline”) the review of development on our hillsides in our community will
have a major impact on the safety, liveability and enjoyment of our neighborhoods.
Parcels in this area were created over 100 years ago, in 1913, when the roads were dirt and San
Francisco residents built summer cabins in the area. Over the years, many of the original lots have
been combined to create reasonably sized parcels more amenable to hillside development. The streets
are city-maintained, very narrow and steep with hair-pin turns; in fact, a portion of Upper Fremont
Drive remains as a dirt road.
Fremont and Upper Fremont are both 2-way dead-end streets with an average width of 12 feet, but in
places only 9 feet wide! City code requires a minimum width of 25’ for a public street (15.07.030).
When 2 cars going opposite directions meet, someone must back-up onto private property in order for
the cars to pass, sometimes perilously backing uphill. There are no Fire Truck turn-arounds on either
road and Fed-Ex has refused to deliver packages to portions of the hill due to the inability to turn their
trucks around. Residents’ property has been damaged from vehicles backing into railings, fences,
garages, and other cars, parked on private property.
We appreciate the City having the foresight to adopt the Hillside Design Guidelines (HDG) which
protect our hillsides and provide a template for sensible development. We think the current process has
been successful and question whether any streamlining or shortening of the public process will serve
the City’s goal of providing a safe, healthy, and liveable environment in parnership with the community
(Mission Statement, FY 2019-20).
Summary of our positions:
1. Design Review Board (DRB) – We strongly SUPPORT public hearings by the full board for all
hillside development
2. Downgrade the review and action on Hillside Exception requests from the City Council to the
Planning Commission – We strongly OPPOSE the transfer of authority from the City Council to
the Planning Commission to decide any Exceptions to Hillside development guidelines or
standards.
Discussion:
1. We SUPPORT maintaining the full Design Review Board hearings for hillside development.
The Design Review Board:
• Provides a valuable service to the city.
• Has extensive experience and expertise that is difficult to replicate or replace if disbanded.
• Provides expertise with design on sites that are difficult to develop because of shape, size or
topography.
• Has extensive experience resolving design challenges for hillside development.
• Improves compliance with the Hillside Design Guidelines and limits the need for Exceptions.
• Public hearings should be required for projects requesting Exceptions to the HDG.
• Promotes excellence in project design.
• Provides support and oversight to “fill in the gaps” for reduced staffing or inexperienced staff in
the Planning Department.
• Provides interested residents and those directly impacted an opportunity to comment on the
design.
• Proposed changes would not allow the public to submit comments about the design or in any
way participate in the design review process.
• Design issues not adequately addressed by the DRB will be moved to the Planning Commission
which holds less design expertise.
• Instead of saving time, it may increase time at the Planning Commission to resolve issues that
were previously heard before the DRB.
• The City, as a whole, benefits from well designed buildings that, once built, will be there for the
enjoyment and harmony of the community for many years to come.
The Council may want to differentiate between process changes for large commercial/residential
projects in the downtown or Costco at Northgate that generate a large public response versus hillside
development which usually involves smaller projects but needs extra attention to the design because of
the City’s intention and adoption of additional design criteria to protect our hillsides.
We see significant value in maintaining the Design Review Board hearings for hillside development.
In a recent application for a 3-story home on this hillside, the planning department chose to forgo the
DRB hearing for a less formal review. The plans only showed one exterior door and code requires at
least two means of egress; the limited design review did not discover this. We included this deficiency
in our comments but we didn’t see the plans until after the design review. The Planning Commission
will now need to address this design flaw. The planner suggested that the building department could
swap a window out for a door but we feel all design issues should be addressed in the early stages of
review, not after the project has been approved, sparing all parties wasted time, costs and frustration.
In another instance, a member of the Design Review Board discovered that the square footage of the lot
was overstated by more than 1,000 sq feet on the plans. This is critical on hillside lots because both the
lot square footage and slope are used to determine the natural state requirement (ie: amount of square
footage to be left in a “natural state”) which ultimately determines the size of the home that can be
built. An overstatement of the lot size can result in a larger house than would otherwise be allowed.
2. We strongly OPPOSE the downgrading of Exception approval from the City Council to the
Planning Commission for all projects subject to the Hillside Development standards for the following
reasons:
• The current process has been in effect for almost 30 years and has been very effective at
improving design quality in our hillside residential neighborhoods, as intended.
• The City Council further clarified their intention of requiring Exception approval by the City
Council in 2010 by inserting the phrase “City Council Exception Required” in 14.12.040 (Ord.
No. 1882).
• The proposed change undermines the Hillside Design Guidelines’ original intent to require
oversight by the City Council for any deviation from the objectives of Hillside Development
standards.
• The proposed change would allow the Planning Commission “carte blanche” to approve any
and all Exceptions without limitation on the number or extent of deviation from the standard.
• The Planning Commission doesn’t have the gravitas to evaluate Exceptions that carry the
potential to threaten public health and safety, e.g: an Exception to the parking requirement that
results in road blockages and lack of access for fire and emergency vehicles.
• Reverses successful practices of the past, changing the character of hillside neighborhoods, and
creating ill-intended negative impacts on residents.
• Shifts the burden from the developer justifying the Exception to an appellant proving why an
Exception approved by the Planning Commission should be reversed.
• Creates a barrier to public participation by requiring payment of a $350 filling fee to appeal a
Planning Commission decision to the City Council for an Exception.
• Possible increase in the number of appeals filed before the City Council.
• What appears as a minor change could prove disastrous over time as developers pursue
approval of hillside Exceptions more aggressively and with more frequency and acceptance,
resulting in “process creep” where Exceptions become the “norm” and Hillside Development
Standards are no longer relevant.
• With the paring down of the Design Review Board input and proposed downgrading of City
Council’s authority for approving Exceptions, the review and approval process of a hillside
development is reduced to the Planning Commission, as the sole hearing body, or in some cases,
the Zoning Administrator, reversing years of past practice involving a careful and thorough
review and resulting in what we believe is an incomplete process.
• Decisions about Exceptions that impact Public Health and Safety are best made by the City
Council, NOT the Planning Commission.
The original development of the Hillside Design Guidelines, in 1992, went through a rigorous
development and review process. It received outstanding national recognition for protecting
environmental resources and providing architectural guidelines to prevent massive, out-of-scale hillside
development. The City received several outstanding planning awards from the American Planning
Association and the Guidelines have served as a model for other communities across the country!
It was the intention of the City Council at the time of adoption of the Hillside Guidelines that City
Council approval was required for all Exceptions. As Council member Joan Thayer said, “how could
we carry out the objectives of the standards if all of the criteria is waivable.” Council member Cyr
Miller said that “exceptions should be limited to those which are absolutely legally necessary and limit
approval to the City Council.” Sheila Delimont, the assistant Planning Director at the time, said that “if
it is approved by the City Council, it has to be superior to what the Guidelines require” and that
exceptions would not be granted wholesale, but only after careful consideration by the Design Review
Board and City Council.
The decision to require the City Council to hear exceptions was intentional. There was careful
deliberation about what this meant and why it was important to require City Council approval of
Exceptions. With enough flexibility in the guidelines, any exception to the guidelines should be based
on a superior application of the guidelines, not a dismissal of them. That is reflected in the current
municipal code, 14.12.040. B. which states the criteria for granting an exception:
“Alternative design solutions which minimize grading, retain more of the project site in its natural
state, minimize visual impacts, protect significant trees, or protect natural resources result in a
demonstrably superior project with greater sensitivity to the natural setting and compatibility with
and sensitivity to nearby structures.”
In fact, the City Council strengthened the wording for Exceptions to Hillside development standards in
2010 (Ord. 1882) by adding the words “City Council Exception Required”.
Now is not the time to reverse course. Thorough Design Review and Exception approval by the City
Council are critical to maintain the continued success of hillside development in San Rafael. A
temporary economic slump is not a reason to loosen the standards. Once changed, it would be very
difficult to reinstate after the economy recovers and the negative impacts on our neighborhoods are
permanent.
The Planning Commission’s role is to make decisions on development and land use applications, not
Public Safety. Many of the Exceptions to the Hillside development standards have a direct impact on
Public Health and Safety and are best decided by the City Council. For example:
a. Exceptions to the natural state requirement or parking requirements can compromise Public Health
and Safety by impacting emergency access or facilitating the spread of fire to neighboring structures.
On January 4, 2016, a house on Upper Fremont Drive caught fire and resulted in a total loss. To avoid
the first hair-pin turn on Fremont Rd, a large Fire truck stopped on Fremont, just past Marquard, where
fire fighters decided to physically carry heavy equipment 800 feet up the steep hill and down a dirt road
to the burning house. According to the Fire log, at 1:42 am, it says “E54 and B52 are stuck unable to
get out at this time.” The Chief officer car and a Suppression Engine were stuck and could not get off
the hill. There is no fire truck turn-around on Upper Fremont, as required by the International Fire
Code which requires a turn-around on access roads in excess of 150 feet (Section D 103.4). Lack of a
fire truck turn-around makes it impossible to maneuver emergency vehicles.
Fortunately, this disaster occurred during a cold rainstorm, in the dead of night. If not for the rain, it
could have been much worse. Imagine if it had happened on a dry, windy, hot summer day during a
rolling PG&E blackout. The burning house was far enough from other homes that flying embers were
less likely to land on neighboring rooftops. Development that complies with the natural state
requirement creates enough distance between hillside homes to prevent the quick spread of fire. If
hillside parking standards are relaxed, illegally parked cars could block access for fire and emergency
vehicles or block evacuation and trap residents during an emergency.
The Fire Marshall recently commented on access issues for a vacant lot on Upper Fremont:
“The Fire Department is unable to provide emergency fire or EMS services that meets NFPA
Standard 1710 response time criteria because the existing public roadway does not accommodate
fire apparatus vehicles and does not meet CFC provisions for Fire Apparatus Access Roads. San
Rafael Fire vehicles are unable to maneuver to this property due to unusual topographical
conditions, substandard roadway width, and hairpin type curves that do not meet CFC turning
radius provisions. Additionally, there is no existing provision on Upper Fremont Drive to
accommodate the turning around of fire apparatus as required by CFC Appendix D."
There is no firetruck turnaround on Upper Fremont Drive or at the end of Fremont Road. These are
both dead-end streets with only one way in, and one way out.
b. Comprehensive geotechnical and hydrological assessment is important to avoid building on unstable
slopes and underground aquifers, causing damage to nearby properties or city streets.
This hillside has a history of landslides caused by unstable slopes and excessive runoff during the rainy
season. Areas subject to slides or instability are a threat to public safety. Slippage and collapse,
drainage and erosion can threaten neighboring properties.
Exceptions to Hillside development standards should remain the exception and not the norm. The City
Council is the appropriate body to make the final determination whether an Exception will compromise
public safety or subject the City to potential litigation in the future.
In closing, we request that you ask yourselves the following:
• What is the outcome you envision as a result of these "streamlining" proposals? Do you expect
the outcome, in this case the approved development, to be the same?
• We understand the need to create an efficient system that works for everyone. However, by
eliminating steps in the review process (taking short-cuts), are you really "improving" the
process, or is the quality of the process being compromised?
• Whose interests are best served by eliminating public hearings in front of the Design Review
Board and City Council (re Exceptions) for hillside developments)?
• Have you considered that eliminating these public hearings may be perceived as a lack of
transparency, especially during COVID-19 restrictions.
• Finally, please explain how eliminating public hearings fulfills your Mission Statement (FY
2019-20) to work in partnership with the community to create safe, healthy and liveable
environments.
We are pleased to receive support from our hillside neighbors in Gerstle Park, as noted below. We trust
our comments will be taken seriously, and we appreciate your careful consideration.
Sincerely,
Victoria DeWitt, Fremont Rd Amy and Joe Likover, Reservoir (Gerstle Park)
Fred P. Cushing, Upper Fremont Tom Heinz, Clorinda (Gerstle Park)
Michael Smith, Upper Fremont Denise Van Horn, Clorinda (Gerstle Park)
Davis Perkins, Upper Fremont Emese Wood, Gloria Dr (Gerstle Park)
Toni McIntyre, Marquard Dolores Manuel, Estates Court (Gerstle Park)
Mikei Davis, Upper Fremont Lori Davis, Upper Fremont
Steve Thomson, Fremont Rd Jasmin Thomson, Fremont Rd
Maren DeGraff, Fremont Rd Adam DeGraff, Fremont Rd
Zanette Johnson, PhD, Marquard Mark Abadi, Marquard
Crystal Wright, Upper Fremont Rena Harel, Upper Fremont
Tim Bowen, Fremont Rd Anne Bowen, Fremont Rd
cc: Paul Jensen, Community Development Director
September 21, 2020
Honorable Mayor Phillips and City Council members
City of San Rafael
1400 Fifth Ave. Room 203
San Rafael, CA. 94901
CITY COUNCIL Hearing for Monday, Sept 21 -
Agenda item 5.a. Measures to Facilitate Housing Development and Streamline
Approvals
Honorable Mayor Phillips and City Council members:
We are pleased with the new policy direction proposed by staff to include public noticing and public
comment and participation in the Design Review meetings. We have the following
comments/questions regarding this proposal:
1. Will noticing procedures be similar to current noticing procedures for the DRB?
2. Will the public be able to submit written comments after having an opportunity to review the
plans?
3. Will the meeting occur in the evening, rather than in the daytime, to accommodate residents that
work during the day?
4. For hillside development projects, isn’t it generally preferable to hold the Design Review
meeting BEFORE the Planning Commission hearing since compliance with the Hillside
Guidelines is a major part of the review?
We continue to OPPOSE the downgrading of Hillside Exception approval from the City Council to the
Planning Commission. However, in light of staff’s current recommendation to adopt this change and
recognizing that even with the best intentions of the current staff and City Council to discourage
Exception requests, this intention may diminish over time as turnover in staff and City Council occurs.
As such, we recognize the importance of providing clear guidance to the Planning Commission to assist
in their decision making process when reviewing requests for Exceptions to the Hillside Design
Guidelines and Development standards.
We are proposing the following changes to municipal code 14.12.040 in order to provide clear
guidelines to the Planning Commission and provide standards for hillside projects seeking an
Exception:
Proposed SRMC Amendments to 14.12.040 -Exceptions to property
development standards.
Deletions are shown as strikethroughs
Additions are shown underlined
14.12.040 -Exceptions to property development standards.
City Council Planning Commission Exception Required. Minor Exceptions to the
property development standards of this chapter may be approved by the city
council planning commission, upon the recommendation of the design review board
after a noticed public hearing and the planning commission, when the applicant has
demonstrated that alternative design concepts carry out the objectives of this
chapter and are consistent with the general plan and other provisions of the
municipal code, based on including the following criteria:
A. The project design alternative meets the stated objectives of the hillside design
guidelines to preserve the inherent characteristics of hillside sites and minimize
grading, display sensitivity to the natural hillside setting and compatibility with
nearby hillside neighborhoods, and maintain a strong relationship to the natural
setting; and
B. Alternative design solutions which minimize grading, retain more of the project
site in its natural state, minimize visual impacts, protect significant trees, or protect
natural resources and natural drainage ways result in a demonstrably superior
project with greater sensitivity to the natural setting and compatibility with and
sensitivity to nearby structures. ; and
C. That granting the exception will not be detrimental or injurious to persons,
property or improvements in the vicinity of the development site, or to the public
health, safety or general welfare; and
D. Grading is limited to only what is necessary to allow reasonable development
of the site. Exceptions for excessive grading shall include a geotechnical report
required by the Geotechnical Review Matrix (Exhibit F) with recommendations from
the City Engineer as to the Safety and Feasibility of the proposed development
prior to the Design Review Board public meeting; and
E. The burden of proof shall be on the applicant to show that there are compelling
reasons for granting the exception; and
F. Adequate fire safety measures have been incorporated into the design of the
project including necessary improvements for fire and emergency vehicle access;
and
G. The proposed exception will not result in degradation of the Hillside Design
Guidelines by introducing an undesirable precedent.
In addition, I think it would be helpful to define when the grading and excavation required by a
project exceeds the amount allowed or intended by the Hillside Guidelines and needs an
Exception.
We appreciate your careful consideration of our comments.
Respectfully submitted,
Victoria DeWitt, Fremont Amy and Joe Likover, Reservoir (Gerstle Park)
Davis Perkins, Upper Fremont Dolores Manuel, Estate Court (Gerstle Park)
Crystal Wright, Upper Fremont Emese Wood, Gloria Dr (Gerstle Park)
Steve Thomson, Fremont Ron Freshman, Blossom Ct (Bret Harte)
Tim Bowen, Fremont Anne Bowen, Fremont
Mark Abadi, Marquard Zanette Johnson, PhD, Marquard
Toni McIntyre, Marquard Rena Harel, Upper Fremont
Adam DeGraff, Fremont Maren DeGraff, Fremont
Jasmin Thomson, Fremont Davis Perkins, Upper Fremont
Lori Davis, Upper Fremont Crystal Wright, Upper Fremont
Michael Davis, Upper Fremont
Community Development Department – Planning Division
P. O. Box 151560, San Rafael, CA 94915-1560
PHONE: (415) 485-3085/FAX: (415) 485-3184
Meeting Date: November 17, 2020
Agenda Item:
2
Case Numbers:
Project Planner:
Ethan Guy 415-458-2392
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBJECT: Informational Report on Renter Protections in the Federally Designated Opportunity
Zone
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of potential amendments to SRMC Title 10 increasing
renter relocation assistance for households displaced as a result of a no-fault eviction within the federally
designated Opportunity Zone in the Canal Neighborhood of San Rafael
RECOMMENDATION
Accept Report.
BACKGROUND
On November 2, 2020, the City Council was presented a comprehensive, informational report on renter
relocation assistance in the Opportunity Zone located in the Canal Neighborhood of San Rafael. At this
meeting, Staff provided a draft ordinance adding Chapter 10.110 of the San Rafael Municipal Code entitled
“Renter Relocation Assistance in Opportunity Zones.” This draft ordinance would expand renter relocation
assistance for households displaced as a result of a no-fault eviction in the Opportunity Zone.
Staff was directed to move forward with the proposed ordinance to renter relocation assistance. Prior to a
City Council first reading of this Ordinance, Staff recommended presenting an overview of these changes
to the Planning Commission. Staff anticipates returning to the City Council for action on the ordinance early
2021.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
This report is provided for informational purposes and therefore will have no physical impact on the
environment. The report is classified as a planning study, which qualifies for a Statutory Exemption from
the provisions of the CEQA Guidelines under 14 CRR Section 15262.
NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING / CORRESPONDENCE
Notice of hearing for the project was conducted in accordance with noticing requirements contained in
Chapter 29 of the Zoning Ordinance. A Notice of Public Hearing was mailed to all property owners and
occupants within a 300-foot radius of the subject site and the Canal Neighborhood Association, and all
other interested parties, 15 calendar days prior to the date of all meetings, including this hearing. Public
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case No: Page 2
notice was also posted on the subject site 15 calendar days prior to the date of all meetings, including
this hearing.
OPTIONS
The Planning Commission has the following options to consider on this matter:
1. Accept report.
2. Direct staff to return with more information.
3. Take no action.