HomeMy WebLinkAboutCD Aldersly Retirement Community Project____________________________________________________________________________________
FOR CITY CLERK ONLY
Council Meeting: December 5, 2022
Disposition: Resolution 15166 x Waived further reading of the ordinance and referred to it by title
only, and introduced the ordinance x Resolution 15167
Agenda Item No: 3.b
Meeting Date: December 5, 2022
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Department: Community Development
Prepared by: Alicia Giudice
Community Development Director
City Manager Approval: ______________
TOPIC: ALDERSLY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY PROJECT
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF ACTIONS AS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION
FOR THE PHASED DEVELOPMENT OF NEW BUILDINGS AND OTHER
IMPROVEMENTS, AND DEMOLITION OF EXISTING BUILDINGS ON THE
ALDERSLY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY PROPERTY, INCLUDING 14 ADDITIONAL
INDEPENDENT LIVING UNITS ON A 2.9 ACRE SITE LOCATED AT 326 AND 308
MISSION AVENUE:
i.RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT,
ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND
ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FOR THE
ALDERSLY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT PROJECT
ii.INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL CITY
COUNCIL APPROVING A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONING FROM
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (PD 1775) TO PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (PD) AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN INCLUDING 14
NET NEW INDEPENDENT LIVING UNITS FOR THE 2.9-ACRE SENIOR
RETIREMENT COMMUNITY SITE LOCATED AT 308 AND 326 MISSION
AVENUE
iii. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE MASTER USE PERMIT AMENDMENT (UP20-
022) AND ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT (ED20-051) FOR
THE ALDERSLY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY AT 308 AND 326 MISSION
AVENUE (APN 014-054-31 and 32)
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council take the following actions:
1.Resolution Certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report, Adopting a Statement of Overriding
Considerations, and Adopting a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act for the Aldersly Planned Development Amendment Project
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT/PAGE: 2
2. Waive further reading of the ordinance and refer to it by title only, and introduce an Ordinance of
the City of San Rafael City Council Approving a Planned Development Rezoning from Planned
Development District (PD 1775) to Planned Development District (PD) and Development Plan
Including 14 Net New Independent Living Units for the 2.9-Acre Senior Retirement Community
Site Located at 308 and 326 Mission Avenue
3. Resolution Approving the Master Use Permit Amendment (UP20-022) and Environmental and
Design Review Permit (ED20-051) for the Aldersly Retirement Community at 308 and 326
Mission Avenue (APN 014-054-31 and 32)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Aldersly Retirement Community occupies 2.9 acres on the north side of Mission Avenue and
extending to Belle Avenue to the north. The project proposes improvements in three phases that include
demolition and renovation of existing buildings, and construction of new buildings on the Aldersly
campus, including the addition of 14 net new independent living units.
The project proposes a rezoning of the property from Planned Development District (PD1775) approved
in 2002 to a new Planned Development District (PD) with new (revised) PD Development Regulations
to accommodate the proposed Development Plan that provides the flexibility to meet future needs of its
residents with updated, state of the art facilities. The project is also subject to a Master Use Permit as
required by San Rafael Municipal Code (SRMC) §14.07.020.B because it proposes a phased
development in a Planned Development District; and an Environmental and Design Review Permit
because modifications to existing structures and major physical improvements are proposed. With the
approval of revised Planned Development (PD) District Regulations, the project is consistent with the
Zoning Ordinance and General Plan.
The project has been reviewed and recommended for approval by the Design Review Board and
Planning Commission. Staff believes the findings required to approve the project, including findings
required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), can be made.
BACKGROUND:
Starting in 2017, the applicant initiated their engagement with the surrounding community and in July
2019, a two-day design charrette was held with Aldersly residents, staff and neighbors in attendance.
In October 2019, the applicant submitted a Pre-Application and in June 2020 a Conceptual Design
Review application was submitted. On August 5, 2020, the Design Review Board sub-committee offered
comments regarding:
• Parking is a concern given the addition of 14 new units. Buildout should include additional on-
site parking. A parking study should be undertaken if not required.
• Landscaping will be important, particularly along the Mission Avenue frontage.
• Stormwater drainage requirement, including bioretention planters and permeable pavers, shall
be evaluated and included in the plans;
• Massing will be important, particularly along the Mission Avenue frontage. Consider mass-
reducing techniques such as upper-story stepbacks and material and color choices.
On November 2020 the applicant filed formal applications with the City. The project applications were
deemed complete in March 2021.
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT/PAGE: 3
In May 2021 the project was presented to the Montecito Area Residents Association (MARA) and the
applicant conducted a virtual neighborhood meeting on June 9, 2021, via Zoom. Subsequent meetings
with MARA were held during the project review process.
At the October 5, 2021 Design Review Board meeting, the Board reviewed the project and following
discussion, the Board voted to continue the item to allow the applicant time to respond to address the
following:
• Find ways to reduce imposing façade of building along Mission Avenue through architectural
stepbacks, other features, or an increased setback.
• Make an effort to reduce bioswales along Mission to allow increased tree screening of buildings
and parking.
The applicant presented the following revisions at the December 7, 2021 Design Review Board meeting:
• Revisions to Mission Avenue Independent Living building include:
Utilizing more vertical elements to break up the south façade;
Changing the form and material to break the roof line;
• Changing the colors and materials of the center portion of the building in order to break up the
mass.
• Revisions to Bioretention Areas and Landscape Plan;
• Redistribution of bioretention areas on the site that allow for additional trees to be planted
between the Mission Avenue Independent Living building and Mission Avenue Right of way
(ROW).
Following discussion, the Board recommended approval of the project with the above revisions, all of
which are reflected in the project plans and addressed in the proposed conditions of approval as
appropriate.
At the public hearing held on November 15, 2022, the Planning Commission recommended approval of
the project, with comments about the project’s conformance with general plan policies related to historic
resources.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The Aldersly Retirement Community occupies 2.9 acres on the north side of Mission Avenue and
extending to Belle Avenue to the north. The property slopes uphill from Mission Avenue to Belle Avenue.
The campus is fully developed with residential, administrative, and healthcare buildings connected by
an extensive network of landscaped pedestrian paths and gardens. The area surrounding the Aldersly
campus contains a mix of residential, retail, and community services.
The project proposes a rezoning of the property from Planned Development District (PD1775) approved
in 2002 to a new Planned Development District (PD) with new (revised) PD Development Regulations
to accommodate the proposed Development Plan that provides the flexibility to meet future needs of its
residents with facilities. The proposed project includes improvements to campus connectivity,
renovations to current facilities, expansion of some buildings, and new construction. The overall goal of
the project is to keep Aldersly a boutique residential community for older people looking for a home with
hygge (pronounced "hoo-gah") – Danish for the experience of coziness and comfortable conviviality that
engenders feelings of contentment and well-being.
In addition, the project is subject to a Master Use Permit as required by San Rafael Municipal Code
(SRMC) §14.07.020.B because it proposes a phased development in a Planned Development District.
The Master Use Permit, if approved, would supersede the Master Use Permit approved in 2002. An
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT/PAGE: 4
Environmental and Design Review Permit is also required by SRMC §14.25.040.A.2 and A.3 because
modifications to existing structures and major physical improvements are proposed.
A more complete project description can be viewed in the November 15, 2022 Staff Report to the
Planning Commission. The complete plan set can be found on the project website: Part 1, Part 2, and
Part 3. Below is a summary of the key elements of the project:
Use: The existing use of the property is a retirement community consistent with the approved PD1775,
and would remain the same under the proposed new Planned Development District. Aldersly would
continue to provide a mix of Assisted Living/Memory Care, Skilled Nursing, and Residential/ Independent
Living units for older adults. The project would result in a net increase of +14 Independent Living units
(an increase from 55 units to 69 units). The permitted use is specified in the proposed Planned
Development regulations (Exhibit B to Attachment 2).
Housing Units and Affordability: The project would contribute toward meeting the goal of producing
more housing by adding 14 senior housing units to the City’s housing inventory and would help meet
the City’s regional housing needs allocation (RHNA). Since all of the proposed 14 independent living
units would include a kitchen and a bathroom, they meet the definition of a dwelling unit and have been
included in the anticipated number of units to be completed during the 2023-2031 timeframe. As
conditioned, the project would comply with the City’s affordable housing requirement by paying an in-
lieu Affordable Housing Fee in accordance with SRMC Section 14.16.030.
Site Plan: The project proposes improvements in three phases that include demolition and renovation
of existing buildings, and construction of new buildings on the Aldersly Campus. Buildout of the proposed
Development Plan would result in a new four-level Independent Living building along Mission Avenue,
a new Independent Living building on the western portion of the site, a new service building on the north
portion along Belle Avenue, three renovated/reconfigured buildings, and new outdoor spaces including
a memory care garden, activity lawn, and rose terrace.
Access: Vehicle access to the site would remain substantially the same as existing, except that the
existing driveway to Rosenborg parking garage (east driveway) would shift approximately 30 feet to the
east toward Union Street, and new parking spaces, landscaping and solid fencing would be created
along the east property line. The project also includes a new fully accessible entrance to the campus as
part of the new Independent Living building on Mission Avenue.
Delivery and Loading Areas: Truck Delivery access would continue to be provided on Belle Avenue.
The existing loading and delivery area on Belle Avenue would remain and would continue to
accommodate all deliveries through Phase 1. After completion of Phase 2, a new delivery area for
medium-size trucks would be provided as part of the new service building. The number and type of
trucks used for deliveries to the Aldersly campus are not expected to change.
Architecture: The proposed new buildings have been designed to be visually compatible with the
buildings that will remain on the campus. The exterior materials used for new buildings include brick and
wood cladding, large expanses of glass, and rectilinear massing, consistent with the existing buildings
on the campus. Consistent with the recommendation of the Design Review Board, vertical elements
are used to break up the south façade of the Mission Avenue Independent Living building and changes
in materials and building form are used to break up the building mass.
Building elevations are provided on Sheets A5.1-R, A5.1A-R and A5.2 of the project plan set.
Perspective drawings of the proposed project are shown on Sheets A5.4-R, A5.5-R, and A5.6 of the
project plan set.
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT/PAGE: 5
Landscaping: Aldersly has extensive landscaping and a lush garden setting that contributes
significantly to the aesthetics of the property and the neighborhood. The project would require the
removal of mature trees and other landscaping to make way for new buildings. An inventory of existing
trees on the property identifies trees proposed to be removed at each phase of site development. A
total of 77 trees are proposed to be removed; most of them non-native, ornamental species (Japanese
maple, juniper, Crape myrtle, flowering plum, fruiting and fruitless mulberry), and one large palm tree
along Mission Avenue is proposed to be relocated. Tree removal would occur gradually over many years
as required to make way for the phased development, and many existing trees would remain. A tree
protection plan is included as part of the master landscape plan, which includes a variety of trees, shrubs
and groundcover as shown on the master landscape plan (Sheets L1.2 - L6.1-R of the project plan set).
Special attention was given to the streetscape along the proposed Mission Avenue Independent Living
building. The proposed landscape plan is consistent with the historic emphasis on Aldersly’s indoor-
outdoor experience.
Grading/Drainage/Water Quality: Currently, runoff from the Project site is conveyed to the existing
storm drain system in Mission Avenue. The County of Marin and the City of San Rafael require any
increased runoff from be discharged and filtered onsite. To reduce the impact of storm runoff, the project
proposes to convey roof gutter drainage to infiltration planters for onsite treatment before being directed
and discharged into the City's storm drainage system at street curbs. Conditions of project approval
recommended by the Department of Public Works require the submittal of documents including a
hydrology study, Stormwater Control Plan to demonstrate conformance with Bay Area Stormwater
Management Agencies Association (BASMAA) and Marin County Stormwater Pollution Prevention
Program (MCSTOPPP) requirements.
ANALYSIS:
A complete analysis of the project’s consistency with the applicable plans, regulations and policies can
be found in Exhibit 5 of the November 15, 2022 Staff Report to the Planning Commission.
General Plan 2040 Consistency:
The project has been reviewed for consistency with the San Rafael General Plan 2040. The site is
designated as High Density Residential on the General Plan 2040 Land Use Map, which allows for the
mix of independent living, assisted living and convalescent care. As noted above, the project also
furthers the goal of providing additional housing. There are numerous general plan policies and
programs that are pertinent to the site and the project. The General Plan contains many competing
policies that need to be weighed and considered. Consistency with a General Plan is determined by
reviewing and weighing the goals and polices of all elements of the San Rafael General Plan 2040. Staff
has evaluated the project and found it to be consistent, or consistent with conditions, for the applicable
San Rafael General Plan 2040 Policies and Programs, including the following Elements: Land Use,
Housing, Community Design and Preservation, Conservation and Climate Change, Noise, Mobility,
Community Services and Infrastructure, and Equity Diversity and Inclusion. On balance, the proposed
project would be consistent with the pertinent policies and programs of the General Plan 2040.
Zoning Ordinance Consistency:
The proposed land use is consistent with the proposed Planned Development (PD) zoning. As noted in
the November 15, 2022 Staff Report to the Planning Commission, the proposed (amended) PD
Regulations are essentially the same as those approved with PD1775 (same setbacks, building height
limit, lot coverage, etc.) but with changes to reflect the proposed Development Plan.
California Environmental Quality Act:
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT/PAGE: 6
The project is subject to environmental review. A Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) has
been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Final EIR is
comprised of the Draft EIR together with the Response to Comments document that contains the
following: (1) a list of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the Draft EIR; (2)
copies of comments received on the Draft EIR; (3) the City’s responses to those comments; and (4)
revisions to the Draft EIR to clarify or correct information. The Final EIR must be certified by the City
Council before the project can be approved.
CEQA also requires the adoption of findings prior to project approval in cases where the certified EIR
identifies significant environmental effects (CEQA Guidelines §§15091 and 15092) and a MMRP
(§15097). The findings must include a statement of overriding considerations for any impact identified
in the EIR as a significant adverse impact that cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant level (CEQA
Guidelines §15093[b]). Draft CEQA findings are included in the proposed Resolution for certification of
the Final EIR (Attachment 1).
The Final EIR identifies one significant and unavoidable adverse impact on Historic Resources that
would result from the Project. This impact can be reduced, although not to a less-than-significant level,
through implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1 identified in the Final EIR. That would require
Aldersly to undertake measures to document and provide interpretation, commemoration, and salvage
of the historic resources prior to any demolition. This would reduce the impact on historic resources, but
not to a less than- significant level. Therefore, the impact would remain significant and unavoidable. All
other environmental impacts would be avoided or less than significant with implementation of mitigation
measures, including impacts related to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources (archeology),
tribal cultural resources, geologic/paleontological resources, and noise. All adopted mitigation measures
are included in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) to ensure CEQA compliance
during Project implementation.
COMMUNITY OUTREACH:
As noted above, the applicant initiated their engagement with the surrounding community in 2017 and
met with the Montecito Area Residents Association (MARA) to share their preliminary plans and seek
input from the surrounding community. In addition, Aldersly held in-person meetings early on to reach
the Montecito/Happy Valley neighbors and solicit input on their plans. Since project applications were
filed with the City, the following neighborhood outreach has occurred:
• Neighborhood meeting hosted by Aldersly held via Zoom on June 9, 2021
• MARA special meeting held via Zoom on January 27, 2022
• MARA special meeting held via Zoom on May 16, 2022
Notice of all public hearings on the project, for the Design Review Board and Planning Commission (15-
day notice), the Draft EIR (CEQA) public comment period (45-day review) and the City Council hearing
(15-day notice) were conducted in accordance with public review period and noticing requirements
contained in the Zoning Ordinance. All notices of public meeting or hearing were mailed to all property
owners and occupants within a 300-foot radius of the subject site, the Domincan/Black Canyon
Neighborhood Association, the Federation of San Rafael Neighborhoods, the Montecito Area Resdients
Association, and all other interested parties, at least 15 days prior to each meeting or hearing. In addition,
notice of each meeting/hearing was posted on the subject site at least 15 days prior to the date of each
meeting or hearing.
CHANGES SINCE PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW:
As discussed during the Planning Commission hearing on November 15, 2022, the applicant has been
working with the property owner of 304 Mission Avenue (corner of Mission Avenue and Union Street)
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 7
regarding the continued use of a portion of property owned by Aldersly. During the applicant’s
presentation to the Planning Commission, it was noted that an agreement has been reached with the
property owner of 304 Mission Avenue, which would allow for the property to continue to be used as part
of the outdoor space of 304 Mission Avenue. The applicant has submitted a schematic drawing that
shows the area and the changes to the site plan. It is staff’s opinion that this change would be beneficial
to the adjacent neighbors east of the Aldersly campus and it would have minimal effect on the overall
project site plan. However, this change would result in two fewer on-site parking spaces being added.
Instead of eight (8) spaces being added as part of the project, an additional six (6) parking spaces would
be added, for a total of 54 parking spaces rather than 56 on-site spaces. The six additional on-site parking
spaces would be sufficient to meet the additional parking demand associated with the proposed project
(14 additional Independent Living units and 2.4 FTE). In addition, it is noted that the Aldersly campus is
located approximately 0.4 miles southwest of the SMART Downtown San Rafael Station. Per recent State
legislation (AB 2097), minimum parking requirements cannot be imposed or enforced in any residential,
commercial, or other development project located within ½ mile of public transit after January 1, 2023.
Nevertheless, the project would voluntarily provide six (6) additional on-site parking spaces over what
exists today. In addition, Condition 8 of the Master Use Permit (Attachment 3) would require that Aldersly
implement a Parking Management Strategy to maximize on-site parking during peak periods and reduce
the use of on-street parking in the neighborhood. Based on the above, staff recommends approval of this
revision to the proposed Development Plan.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The costs associated with processing the planning applications for this project are borne by the applicant
and are subject to 100% cost recovery of staff time, and therefore would have no direct fiscal impact on
the City budget.
In addition, the project would generate one (1) net new AM trip and two (2) net new PM trips for a total of
3 peak-hour trips that would be subject to the payment of a Traffic Mitigation Fee of $12,738 (3 trips x
$4,246/new peak hour traffic trip) to assist in funding off-site transportation improvements. All utility
connections (sewer, water, gas/electric) will be constructed at the cost of the property owner. Further, all
public improvements along the site frontages will be constructed at the cost of the property owner.
OPTIONS:
The City Council has the following options:
1. Approve the applications as presented, with recommended conditions (staff
recommendation);
2. Approve the applications with certain modifications, changes or additional conditions of
approval;
3. Continue the hearing to allow the applicant to address any of the Council’s comments or
concerns; or
4. Deny the project and direct staff to return with revised Resolutions.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Resolution Certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report, Adopting a Statement of Overriding
Considerations, and Adopting a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act for the Aldersly Planned Development Amendment Project
2. Waive further reading of the ordinance and refer to it by title only, and introduce an Ordinance of
the City of San Rafael City Council Approving a Planned Development Rezoning from Planned
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 8
Development District (PD 1775) to Planned Development District (PD) and Development Plan
Including 14 Net New Independent Living Units for the 2.9-Acre Senior Retirement Community
Site Located at 308 and 326 Mission Avenue
3. Resolution Approving the Master Use Permit Amendment (UP20-022) and Environmental and
Design Review Permit (ED20-051) for the Aldersly Retirement Community at 308 and 326 Mission
Avenue (APN 014-054-31 and 32)
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Certifying Final EIR and Adopting MMRP
2. Ordinance Adopting a Planned Development (PD) Rezoning
3. Resolution Conditionally Approving the Master Use Permit and Environmental and Design Review
Permit
4. Public comments
5. Public Hearing Notice
1
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
ALDERSLY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
ZC20-001, UP20-022, ED 20-051
Mitigation Measure Implementation
Procedure Monitoring
Responsibility Monitoring / Reporting
Action & Schedule Non-Compliance
Sanction/Activity Monitoring
Compliance
Record
(Name/Date)
AIR QUALITY
Mitigation Measure AQ-1: Best Management Practices.
During any construction period ground disturbance, the
applicant shall ensure that the project contractor implement
measures to control dust and exhaust. Implementation of the
measures recommended by BAAQMD and listed below would
reduce the air quality impacts associated with grading and new
construction to a less-than-significant level. Additional
measures are identified to reduce construction equipment
exhaust emissions. The contractor shall implement the
following BMPs:
1. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil
piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be
watered two times per day
2. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material
off-site shall be covered.
3. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads
shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers
at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is
prohibited.
4. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15
miles per hour (mph).
5. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be
completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as
soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders
are used.
6. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment
off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to
5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics
control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of
Require as a condition of approval
Planning Division
Building Division
Incorporate as condition of project approval
Building Division verifies appropriate approvals obtained prior to issuance of building permit
Deny issuance of
grading/demolition/ building permit
ATTACHMENT 1
EXHIBIT A
2
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
ALDERSLY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
ZC20-001, UP20-022, ED 20-051
Mitigation Measure Implementation
Procedure Monitoring
Responsibility Monitoring / Reporting
Action & Schedule Non-Compliance
Sanction/Activity Monitoring
Compliance
Record
(Name/Date)
Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for
construction workers at all access points.
7. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly
tuned in accordance with manufacturer's specifications. All
equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and
determined to be running in proper condition prior to
operation.
8. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and
person to contact at the Lead Agency regarding dust
complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective
action within 48 hours. The Air District' s phone number
shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable
regulations.
Mitigation Measure AQ-2: Selection of equipment during
construction to minimize emissions.
The project sponsor shall achieve a fleet-wide average
reduction in DPM exhaust emissions from the onsite, off-road
construction equipment by 65-percent or greater in order to stay
below BAAQMD thresholds. One feasible way to achieve this
reduction would include the following:
• All diesel-powered off-road equipment, larger than 25
horsepower, operating on the site for more than two days
continuously shall, at a minimum, meet U.S. EPA
particulate matter emissions standards for Tier 4 engines.
Where Tier 4 equipment is not available, exceptions could
be made for equipment that includes CARB-certified Level
3 Diesel Particulate Filters or equivalent. Equipment that is
electrically powered or uses non-diesel fuels would also
meet this requirement.
• All aerial lifts shall be compressed natural gas (CNG)
powered.
Require as a condition of approval
Planning Division Building Division
Incorporate as condition of project approval Building Division verifies appropriate approvals obtained prior to issuance of building permit
Deny issuance of
grading/demolition/ building permit
EXHIBIT 1
ATTACHMENT A
3
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
ALDERSLY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
ZC20-001, UP20-022, ED 20-051
Mitigation Measure Implementation
Procedure Monitoring
Responsibility Monitoring / Reporting
Action & Schedule Non-Compliance
Sanction/Activity Monitoring
Compliance
Record
(Name/Date)
Alternatively, the applicant can develop a different plan
demonstrating that the off-road equipment used onsite to
construct the project would achieve a fleet-wide average 65-
percent reduction in diesel particulate matter (DPM) exhaust
emissions or greater.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Avoidance of Nesting Birds.
Nests of native birds in active use shall be avoided in
compliance with State and federal regulations. Vegetation
clearing and construction shall be initiated outside the bird
nesting season (February 1 through August 31) or
preconstruction surveys shall be conducted by a qualified
biologist within a minimum of 300 feet from the project site
where access is feasible and no more than seven days prior to
any disturbance. If active nests are encountered (i.e., one
containing eggs or young), a work‐exclusion buffer shall be
implemented around the nest commensurate with the nest
location and species. In some cases, buffers may be as small as
25 feet for hidden nests (e.g., in tree or building cavities) and/or
for urban adapted species; buffers may also extend up to 300
feet for raptors or more sensitive species. No construction
activity shall occur within the established buffer until it is
determined by a qualified biologist that the young have fledged
(that is, left the nest) or the nest has become otherwise inactive
(e.g. due to predation). At that time the buffer may be removed
and work within the buffer resume.
Require as a condition of approval
Planning Division Building Division
Incorporate as condition of project approval Building Division verifies appropriate approvals obtained prior to issuance of building permit
Deny issuance of
grading/demolition/ building permit
Mitigation Measure BIO-2 Roosting Bat Habitat
Assessment and Surveys: Prior to any tree removal, a
qualified biologist shall conduct a habitat assessment for bats.
A qualified bat biologist shall have: 1) at least two years of
experience conducting bat surveys that resulted in detections
for relevant species, such as pallid bat, with verified project
EXHIBIT 1
ATTACHMENT A
4
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
ALDERSLY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
ZC20-001, UP20-022, ED 20-051
Mitigation Measure Implementation
Procedure Monitoring
Responsibility Monitoring / Reporting
Action & Schedule Non-Compliance
Sanction/Activity Monitoring
Compliance
Record
(Name/Date)
names, dates, and references, and 2) experience with relevant
equipment used to conduct bat surveys. The habitat assessment
shall be conducted a minimum of 30 to 90 days prior to tree
removal and shall include a visual inspection of potential
roosting features (e.g., cavities, crevices in wood and bark,
exfoliating bark, suitable canopy for foliage roosting species).
If suitable habitat trees are found, or bats are observed,
mitigation measure BIO-3 shall be implemented.
Mitigation Measure BIO-3 Roosting Bat Tree Protections:
If the qualified biologist identifies potential bat habitat trees,
then tree trimming and tree removal shall not proceed unless
the following occurs: 1) a qualified biologist conducts night
emergence surveys or completes visual examination of roost
features that establishes absence of roosting bats, or 2) tree
trimming and tree removal occurs only during seasonal periods
of bat activity, from approximately March 1 through April 15
and September 1 through October 15, and tree removal occurs
using the two-step removal process. Two-step tree removal
shall be conducted over two consecutive days. The first day (in
the afternoon), under the direct supervision and instruction by
a qualified biologist with experience conducting two-step tree
removal, limbs and branches shall be removed by a tree cutter
using chainsaws only; limbs with cavities, crevices or deep
bark fissures shall be avoided. The second day the entire tree
shall be removed.
Require as a condition of approval
Planning Division Building Division
Incorporate as condition of project approval Building Division verifies appropriate approvals obtained prior to issuance of building permit
Deny issuance of
grading/demolition/
building permit
CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Mitigation Measure CUL-1: Interpretation and
Commemoration of Historic Resources. Prior to issuance of
demolition permit(s), the project sponsor shall undertake the
following measures to document and provide interpretation,
Require as a condition of approval
Planning Division Building Division
Incorporate as condition of project approval Building Division verifies appropriate
Deny issuance of
grading/demolition/ building permit
EXHIBIT 1
ATTACHMENT A
5
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
ALDERSLY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
ZC20-001, UP20-022, ED 20-051
Mitigation Measure Implementation
Procedure Monitoring
Responsibility Monitoring / Reporting
Action & Schedule Non-Compliance
Sanction/Activity Monitoring
Compliance
Record
(Name/Date)
commemoration, and salvage of the historic resources to be
demolished, as outlined below:
CUL-1a: Documentation. Prior to issuance of demolition
permits, the project sponsor shall undertake Historic
American Building Survey (HABS)/Historic American
Landscape Survey (HALS)–style documentation of the
property. The documentation shall be funded by the project
sponsor and undertaken by a qualified professional who
meets the standards for history, architectural history, or
architecture (as appropriate) set forth in the Secretary of the
Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards (Code of
Federal Regulations title 36, part 61). The documentation
package created shall consist of the items listed below:
• CUL-1a-1: HABS-style Photographs
• CUL-1a-2: HABS/HALS-style Historical
Report
• CUL-1a-3: HALS-style Site Plan
• CUL-1a-4: Video Documentation
The documentation materials shall be offered to state,
regional, and local repositories, including but not limited to,
the Northwest Information Center (NWIC)-California
Historical Resource Information System, San Rafael Public
Library, the Marin County Free Library’s Anne T. Kent
California Room, and the Marin History Museum. Materials
will either be provided in digital or hard copy formats
depending on the capacity and preference of the repository.
CUL-1a-1: HABS-style Photographs
Digital photographs will be taken of the contributing
buildings and landscape elements and the overall character
and setting of the historic resource. All digital photography
shall be conducted according to current National Park
approvals obtained prior to issuance of building permit
EXHIBIT 1
ATTACHMENT A
6
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
ALDERSLY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
ZC20-001, UP20-022, ED 20-051
Mitigation Measure Implementation
Procedure Monitoring
Responsibility Monitoring / Reporting
Action & Schedule Non-Compliance
Sanction/Activity Monitoring
Compliance
Record
(Name/Date)
Service standards as specified in the National Register Photo
Policy Factsheet (updated May 2013). The photography
shall be undertaken by a qualified professional with
demonstrated experience in documentation photography.
Large format negatives are not required. The scope of the
digital photographs shall be reviewed and approved by the
Planning Division’s staff for concurrence.
Photograph views for the data set shall include contextual
views of the site and each contributing landscape element
and building; elevations of each façade of each building; and
detail views of character-defining features. All photographs
shall be referenced on a photographic key map or site plan.
The photographic key shall show the photograph number
with an arrow to indicate the direction of the view.
CUL-1a-2: HABS/HALS-style Historical Report
A written historical narrative and report will be produced
that meets the HABS/HALS Historical Report Guidelines.
This HABS/HALS-style Historical Report may be based on
the documentation provided in the 2017 Historic Resource
Evaluation for the site and will include historic photographs
and drawings, if available. The written history shall follow
the standard outline format that begins with a statement of
significance for the historic district, describes the
architectural and historical context of the district, and
includes descriptions of each contributing building and
landscape feature.
CUL-1a-3: HALS-style Site Plan
A HALS-style site plan shall be prepared that depicts the
existing sizes, scale, dimensions, and relative locations of
the contributing landscape elements and buildings related to
the historic resource. Particular attention will be paid to the
EXHIBIT 1
ATTACHMENT A
7
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
ALDERSLY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
ZC20-001, UP20-022, ED 20-051
Mitigation Measure Implementation
Procedure Monitoring
Responsibility Monitoring / Reporting
Action & Schedule Non-Compliance
Sanction/Activity Monitoring
Compliance
Record
(Name/Date)
arrangement and plantings of landscape features that are
contributing resources to the historic resource.
Documentation of all plantings is not required, but depiction
of the locations and types of mature trees, and designed
hardscape and landscape features shall be included.
CUL-1a-4: Video Recordation. Video recordation shall be
undertaken prior to the issuance of demolition permits. The
project sponsor shall undertake a video documenting the
historic resource and its setting. The documentation shall be
conducted by a professional videographer, preferably one
with experience recording architectural resources. The
documentation shall be narrated by a qualified professional
who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional
Qualification Standards for history, architectural history, or
architecture (as appropriate). The documentation shall
include as much information as possible—using visuals in
combination with narration—about the materials,
construction methods, current condition, historic use,
historic context, and historic significance of the historic
resource. The video documentation shall be reviewed and
approved by the Planning Division’s staff prior to issuance
of demolition permits.
CUL-1b: Interpretation. The project sponsor shall provide
a permanent display (or multiple displays) of interpretive
materials concerning the history of Aldersly in the Northern
California Danish-American community and the
architectural features of the Aldersly Retirement
Community campus as designed in the 1961-1968 master
plan by master architect Rex Whitaker Allen. Interpretation
of the site’s history shall be supervised by an architectural
historian or historian who meets the Secretary of the
EXHIBIT 1
ATTACHMENT A
8
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
ALDERSLY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
ZC20-001, UP20-022, ED 20-051
Mitigation Measure Implementation
Procedure Monitoring
Responsibility Monitoring / Reporting
Action & Schedule Non-Compliance
Sanction/Activity Monitoring
Compliance
Record
(Name/Date)
Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards. The high-
quality interpretive display(s) shall be installed within the
project site boundaries, made of durable, all-weather
materials, and positioned to allow for high public visibility
and interactivity. In addition to narrative text, the
interpretative display(s) may include, but are not limited to,
a display of photographs, news articles, memorabilia,
drawings, and/or video. A proposal describing the general
parameters of the interpretive program shall be approved by
the Planning Division’s staff prior to issuance of building
permits. The content, media, and other characteristics of the
interpretive display shall be approved by the Planning
Division’s staff prior to issuance of a Temporary Certificate
of Occupancy.
CUL-1c: Salvage. Prior to any demolition or construction
activities that would remove character-defining features of a
resource that is a contributor to the historic resource on the
project site, the project sponsor shall consult with a qualified
architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary
of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards as to
whether any such features may be salvaged, in whole or in
part, during demolition/alteration. The project sponsor shall
submit a list of materials that will be salvaged and reused
either on the site or within the interpretive program to the
Planning Division for review prior to the beginning of
demolition on the site. The project sponsor shall make a
good faith effort to salvage materials of historical interest to
be utilized as part of the interpretative program. No
materials shall be salvaged or removed until HABS/HALS-
style recordation and documentation are completed.
EXHIBIT 1
ATTACHMENT A
9
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
ALDERSLY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
ZC20-001, UP20-022, ED 20-051
Mitigation Measure Implementation
Procedure Monitoring
Responsibility Monitoring / Reporting
Action & Schedule Non-Compliance
Sanction/Activity Monitoring
Compliance
Record
(Name/Date)
Mitigation Measure CUL-2: Conduct Cultural
Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Sensitivity and
Awareness Training Program Prior to Ground-
Disturbing Activities. Prior to issuance of a building
permit, grading permit, or demolition permit involving any
potential ground disturbing activity, all construction
contractor(s) responsible for overseeing and operating
ground‐disturbing mechanical equipment (e.g., onsite
construction managers and backhoe operators) shall be
required to participate in a cultural resources and tribal
cultural resources sensitivity and awareness training
program (Worker Environmental Awareness Program
[WEAP]) for all personnel involved in Project construction,
including field consultants and construction workers. The
WEAP shall be developed by an archaeologist that meets the
Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications
Standards in archaeology, and by culturally affiliated Native
American tribes.
The WEAP training shall be conducted by an archaeologist
that meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional
Qualifications Standards in archaeology. A representative
from the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria (FIGR)
shall be invited to participate in the training.
The WEAP training shall be conducted before any Project-
related construction activities begin at the Project site. The
WEAP will include relevant information regarding sensitive
cultural resources and tribal cultural resources, including
applicable regulations, protocols for avoidance, and
consequences of violating State laws and regulations. The
Require as a condition of approval
Planning Division
Building
Division
Incorporate as condition of project approval Building Division verifies appropriate approvals obtained prior to issuance of building permit
Deny issuance of
grading/demolition/
building permit
EXHIBIT 1
ATTACHMENT A
10
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
ALDERSLY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
ZC20-001, UP20-022, ED 20-051
Mitigation Measure Implementation
Procedure Monitoring
Responsibility Monitoring / Reporting
Action & Schedule Non-Compliance
Sanction/Activity Monitoring
Compliance
Record
(Name/Date)
WEAP will also describe appropriate avoidance and impact
minimization measures for cultural resources and tribal
cultural resources that could be located at the Project site and
will outline what to do and who to contact if any potential
cultural resources or tribal cultural resources are
encountered. The WEAP will emphasize the requirement for
confidentiality and culturally appropriate treatment of any
discovery of significance to Native Americans and will
discuss appropriate behaviors and responsive actions,
consistent with Native American tribal values.
The project sponsor shall maintain a record of all
construction personnel that have received this training and
provide the record to the City. These records shall be
submitted to the City prior to issuance of a building permit
involving any ground disturbing activity and shall be
maintained by the applicant throughout the duration of the
construction period. A final record shall be submitted to the
City prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
Mitigation Measure CUL-3: Protect Archaeological
Resources Identified during Construction. The project
sponsor shall ensure that construction crews stop all work
within 100 feet of the discovery until a qualified
archaeologist and FIGR Tribal Monitor can assess the
previously unrecorded discovery and provide
recommendations. Resources could include subsurface
historic features such as artifact-filled privies, wells, and
refuse pits, and artifact deposits, along with concentrations
of adobe, stone, or concrete walls or foundations, and
concentrations of ceramic, glass, or metal materials. Native
American archaeological materials could include obsidian
and chert flaked stone tools (such as projectile and dart
Require as a condition of approval
Planning Division Building Division
Incorporate as condition of project approval Building Division verifies appropriate approvals obtained prior to issuance of building permit
Deny issuance of
grading/demolition/
building permit
EXHIBIT 1
ATTACHMENT A
11
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
ALDERSLY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
ZC20-001, UP20-022, ED 20-051
Mitigation Measure Implementation
Procedure Monitoring
Responsibility Monitoring / Reporting
Action & Schedule Non-Compliance
Sanction/Activity Monitoring
Compliance
Record
(Name/Date)
points), midden (culturally derived darkened soil containing
heat-affected rock, artifacts, animal bones, and/or shellfish
remains), and/or groundstone implements (such as mortars
and pestles).
Mitigation Measure CUL-4: Protect Human Remains
Identified During Construction.
In accordance with the California Health and Safety Code,
if the find includes human remains, or remains that are
potentially human, they shall ensure reasonable protection
measures are taken to protect the discovery from disturbance
(Assembly Bill [AB] 2641). The archaeologist shall notify
the Marin County Coroner (per § 7050.5 of the Health and
Safety Code) and the provisions of § 7050.5 of the California
Health and Safety Code, § 5097.98 of the California PRC,
and AB 2641 shall be implemented. If the coroner
determines the remains are Native American and not the
result of a crime scene, the coroner will notify the NAHC,
which then will designate a Native American Most Likely
Descendant (MLD) for the Project (§ 5097.98 of the PRC).
The designated MLD will have 48 hours from the time
access to the property is granted to make recommendations
concerning treatment of the remains. If the landowner does
not agree with the recommendations of the MLD, the NAHC
can mediate (§ 5097.94 of the PRC). If no agreement is
reached, the landowner shall rebury the remains where they
will not be further disturbed (§ 5097.98 of the PRC). This
shall also include either recording the site with the NAHC
or the appropriate Information Center; using an open space
or conservation zoning designation or easement; or
recording a reinternment document with the county in which
the property is located (AB 2641). Work may not resume
Require as a condition of approval
Planning Division
Building
Division
Incorporate as condition of project approval Building Division verifies appropriate approvals obtained prior to issuance of building permit
Deny issuance of
grading/demolition/
building permit
EXHIBIT 1
ATTACHMENT A
12
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
ALDERSLY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
ZC20-001, UP20-022, ED 20-051
Mitigation Measure Implementation
Procedure Monitoring
Responsibility Monitoring / Reporting
Action & Schedule Non-Compliance
Sanction/Activity Monitoring
Compliance
Record
(Name/Date)
within the no-work radius until the lead agencies, through
consultation as appropriate, determine that the treatment
measures have been completed to their satisfaction.
Mitigation Measure TCR-1: Survey of Site by Trained
Human Remains Detection Dogs. Prior to the issuance of
a grading or building permit, the project sponsor shall
provide written evidence to the City’s Community
Development Department that a qualified consultant has
been retained to conduct a survey of the site using trained
human remains detection dogs. The survey shall be
performed after the demolition of structures but prior to
when trenching, grading, or earthwork on the site
commences. If the survey results in the identification of an
area potentially containing human remains, the area should
be avoided. If avoidance is not feasible, then the City shall
require that a professional archaeologist be retained to
conduct subsurface testing, in the presence of a tribal
representative from FIGR, to verify the presence or absence
of remains. If human remains are confirmed, then the
procedures in the PRC and Mitigation Measure CUL-3 shall
be followed.
Require as a condition of approval
Planning Division
Building
Division
Incorporate as condition of project approval Building Division verifies appropriate approvals obtained prior to issuance of building permit
Deny issuance of
grading/demolition/
building permit
Mitigation Measure TCR-2: Archaeological and Native
American Monitoring and the Discovery of Cultural
Materials and/or Human Remains.
Prior to issuance of a grading permit or building permit, the
project sponsor shall retain a Secretary of the Interior-
qualified archaeologist, with input from the Federated
Indians of Graton Rancheria (FIGR), to prepare a Cultural
Resources Monitoring Plan. Monitoring shall be required
during initial ground-disturbing activities and may be
extended should the area be determined to require
Require as a condition of approval
Planning Division Building Division
Incorporate as condition of project approval Building Division verifies appropriate approvals obtained prior to issuance of building permit
Deny issuance of
grading/demolition/
building permit
EXHIBIT 1
ATTACHMENT A
13
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
ALDERSLY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
ZC20-001, UP20-022, ED 20-051
Mitigation Measure Implementation
Procedure Monitoring
Responsibility Monitoring / Reporting
Action & Schedule Non-Compliance
Sanction/Activity Monitoring
Compliance
Record
(Name/Date)
monitoring of deeper sediments, according to a schedule
outlined in the Cultural Resources Monitoring Plan. The
plan shall include (but not be limited to) the following
components:
Person(s) responsible for conducting monitoring
activities, including an archaeological monitor
and an appropriate number of FIGR Tribal
monitors (number and kind of appropriate
monitors to be determined in consultation with
FIGR);
Person(s) responsible for overseeing and
directing the monitors;
How the monitoring shall be conducted and the
required format and content of monitoring
reports, including schedule for submittal of
monitoring reports and person(s) responsible for
review and approval of monitoring reports;
Protocol for notifications in case of
encountering cultural resources, as well as
methods of dealing with the encountered
resources (e.g., collection, identification,
appropriate documentation, repatriation); and
Methods to ensure security of cultural resources
sites, including protective fencing, security, and
protocol for notifying local authorities (i.e.
Sheriff, Police) should site looting or other
resource damaging or illegal activities occur
during construction.
During the course of the monitoring, the archaeologist, in
consultation with FIGR Tribal monitor, may adjust the
frequency—from continuous to intermittent—based on the
EXHIBIT 1
ATTACHMENT A
14
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
ALDERSLY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
ZC20-001, UP20-022, ED 20-051
Mitigation Measure Implementation
Procedure Monitoring
Responsibility Monitoring / Reporting
Action & Schedule Non-Compliance
Sanction/Activity Monitoring
Compliance
Record
(Name/Date)
conditions and professional judgment regarding the
potential to impact cultural and tribal cultural resources. If
significant tribal cultural resources are identified onsite, all
work shall stop immediately within 100 feet of the
resource(s).
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Mitigation Measure GE0-1: Prior to a grading or building
permit submittal, the project sponsor shall prepare a final
geotechnical investigation prepared by a qualified and
licensed geotechnical engineer and submit the report to the
City Engineer. Minimum mitigation includes design of new
structures in accordance with the provisions of the current
California Building Code or subsequent codes in effect
when final design occurs. Recommended seismic design
coefficients and spectral accelerations shall be consistent
with the findings presented in Geotechnical Investigation
prepared by Rockridge Geotechnical, August 31, 2020.
Require as a condition of approval
Planning Division
Building
Division
Incorporate as condition of project approval Building Division verifies appropriate approvals obtained prior to issuance of building permit
Deny issuance of
grading/demolition/
building permit
Mitigation Measure GE0-2: Should paleontological resources
be encountered during project subsurface construction
activities located in previously undisturbed soil and bedrock,
all ground-disturbing activities within 25 feet shall be halted
and a qualified paleontologist contacted to assess the situation,
consult with agencies as appropriate, and make
recommendations for the treatment of the discovery. For
purposes of this mitigation, a "qualified paleontologist" shall
be an individual with the following qualifications: 1) a graduate
degree in paleontology or geology and/or a person with a
demonstrated publication record in peer- reviewed
paleontological journals; 2) at least two years of professional
experience related to paleontology; 3) proficiency in
recognizing fossils in the field and determining their
significance; 4) expertise in local geology, stratigraphy, and
Require as a condition of approval
Planning Division
Building
Division
Incorporate as condition of project approval Building Division verifies appropriate approvals obtained prior to issuance of building permit
Deny issuance of
grading/demolition/
building permit
EXHIBIT 1
ATTACHMENT A
15
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
ALDERSLY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
ZC20-001, UP20-022, ED 20-051
Mitigation Measure Implementation
Procedure Monitoring
Responsibility Monitoring / Reporting
Action & Schedule Non-Compliance
Sanction/Activity Monitoring
Compliance
Record
(Name/Date)
biostratigraphy; and 5) experience collecting vertebrate fossils
in the field.
If the paleontological resources are found to be significant and
project activities cannot avoid them, measures shall be
implemented to ensure that the project does not cause a
substantial adverse change in the significance of the
paleontological resource. Measures may include monitoring,
recording the fossil locality, data recovery and analysis, a final
report, and accessioning the fossil material and technical report
to a paleontological repository. Upon completion of the
assessment, a report documenting methods, findings, and
recommendations shall be prepared and submitted to the City
for review. If paleontological materials are recovered, this
report also shall be submitted to a paleontological repository
such as the University of California Museum of Paleontology,
along with significant paleontological materials. Public
educational outreach may also be appropriate.
The project applicants shall inform its contractor(s) of the
sensitivity of the project site for paleontological resources and
shall verify that the following directive has been included in the
appropriate contract specification documents:
"The subsurface of the construction site may contain fossils. If
fossils are encountered during project subsurface construction,
all ground-disturbing activities within 25 feet shall be halted
and a qualified paleontologist contacted to assess the situation,
consult with agencies as appropriate, and make
recommendations for the treatment of the discovery. Project
personnel shall not collect or move any paleontological
materials. Fossils can include plants and animals, and such
EXHIBIT 1
ATTACHMENT A
16
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
ALDERSLY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
ZC20-001, UP20-022, ED 20-051
Mitigation Measure Implementation
Procedure Monitoring
Responsibility Monitoring / Reporting
Action & Schedule Non-Compliance
Sanction/Activity Monitoring
Compliance
Record
(Name/Date)
trace fossil evidence of past life as tracks or plant imprints.
Marine sediments may contain invertebrate fossils such as
snails, clam and oyster shells, sponges, and protozoa; and
vertebrate fossils such as fish, whale, and sea lion bones.
Vertebrate land mammals may include bones of mammoth,
camel, saber tooth cat, horse, and bison. Contractor
acknowledges and understands that excavation or removal of
paleontological material is prohibited by law and constitutes a
misdemeanor under California Public Resources Code, Section
5097.5."
NOISE
Mitigation Measure NOI-1: Construction Noise.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit, the
project sponsor shall submit a Construction Noise Management
Plan (CNMP) prepared by a qualified acoustical consultant.
The CNMP shall identify noise attenuation measures to further
reduce potential impacts related to construction noise. Noise
attenuation measures include, but are not limited to, the
following:
a. Installation of a temporary noise barrier along the east and
west property lines of the site. The barrier can be constructed
with plywood or another appropriate material with cracks or
no gaps. The purpose of the barrier is to provide a noticeable
reduction of the noise and meet 90 dBA at residential
receivers on neighboring properties along the common east
and west property lines, where reasonably feasible. The
height of the noise barrier, which may be up to 12 feet at
certain locations, shall take into account the height of the
construction noise sources and site grading and shall be
specified in the Construction Noise Management Plan.
b. All construction equipment shall be equipped with mufflers
and sound control devices (e.g., intake silencers and noise
Require as a condition of approval
Planning Division
Building
Division
Incorporate as condition of project approval Building Division verifies appropriate approvals obtained prior to issuance of building permit
Deny issuance of
grading/demolition/
building permit
Stop Work Order
on construction
activities until
compliance with
Construction noise
thresholds can be
met.
EXHIBIT 1
ATTACHMENT A
17
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
ALDERSLY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
ZC20-001, UP20-022, ED 20-051
Mitigation Measure Implementation
Procedure Monitoring
Responsibility Monitoring / Reporting
Action & Schedule Non-Compliance
Sanction/Activity Monitoring
Compliance
Record
(Name/Date)
shrouds) that are in good condition and appropriate for the
equipment.
c. Maintain all construction equipment to minimize noise
emissions.
d. Stationary equipment shall be located on the site to maintain
the greatest possible distance to the existing residences,
where feasible.
e. Unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines shall be
strictly prohibited.
f. Provide advance notification to surrounding land uses
disclosing the construction schedule, including the various
types of activities that would be occurring throughout the
duration of the construction period.
g. The construction contractor shall provide the name and
telephone number of an on-site construction liaison. If
construction noise is found to be intrusive to the community
(complaints are received), the construction liaison shall
investigate the source of the noise and require that
reasonable measures be implemented to correct the problem.
h. Schedule high noise-producing activities during times when
they would be least likely to interfere with the noise sensitive
activities of the neighboring land use, when possible.
i. Use noise control blankets on temporary fencing that are
used to separate construction areas from occupied on-site
areas.
j. Temporarily relocate residents of on-site dwelling units that
are very close to the construction activities.
k. Consider upgrading windows to reduce construction noise at
on-site dwelling units closest to the construction activities.
EXHIBIT 1
ATTACHMENT A
ATTACHMENT 1
1
RESOLUTION NO. 15166
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL CERTIFYING
THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING
AND REPORTING PROGRAM PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT FOR THE ALDERSLY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT
PROJECT
WHEREAS, on November 12, 2020, Peter Schakow, President of the Aldersly Board
of Directors (applicant), submitted applications for a Planned Development (PD) Zoning
Amendment, Master Use Permit Amendment, and Environmental and Design Review
Permit for the Aldersly Retirement Community Project, which collectively constitute a
“project” under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”); and
WHEREAS, CEQA (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) and the CEQA
Guidelines (Cal. Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.) require an analysis
and determination regarding a project’s potential environmental impacts. It was
determined that the project has the potential to result in potentially significant
environmental effects, and the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) was
recommended; and
WHEREAS, the City released a Notice of Preparation (“NOP”) for the Project to the
Office of Planning and Research (“OPR”) State Clearinghouse and interested agencies
and persons on November 25, 2021 for a 30-day review period, during which interested
agencies and the public could submit comments about the Project. The City held a public
scoping meeting on December 14, 2021. Comments on the NOP were received and
considered during preparation of the Draft EIR; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Availability (“NOA”) was issued and the Draft EIR was made
available for public review on the City’s website on August 16, 2022 for a 45-day public
review period through September 30, 2022; and
WHEREAS, the Draft EIR was filed with the California Office of Planning and
Research on August 17, 2022; and
WHEREAS, the San Rafael Planning Commission held a public comment hearing
on the Draft EIR on September 13, 2022; and
WHEREAS, on November 10, 2022, the City published a Response to Comments
Document that contains all comments received on the Draft EIR during the public
comment period, including those received at the public hearing, and prepared written
responses to those comments in accordance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines. The
Draft EIR and Response to Comments Document, together with the errata, constitute the
Final EIR; and
WHEREAS, all required public notices and public hearings were duly given and held
according to law; and
WHEREAS, after notice having been lawfully given, a duly noticed public hearing was
held before the City Planning Commission on November 15, 2022, at which all persons
interested had the opportunity to appear and comment and at which the Planning
Commission considered and made recommendations to the City Council regarding the
ATTACHMENT 1
2
Final EIR and the merits of the Project; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21082.1(c)(3), the City finds
that the Final EIR reflects the City’s independent judgment as the lead agency for the
Project and is supported by substantial evidence; and
WHEREAS, the Final EIR identified certain potentially significant adverse effects on
the environment caused by the Project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council specifically finds that where more than one reason for
approving the Project and rejecting alternatives is given in its findings or in the record, and
where more than one reason is given for adopting the Statement of Overriding
Considerations, it would have made its decision on the basis of any one of those reasons;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires, in accordance with CEQA, to declare that,
despite the potential for significant environmental effects that cannot be substantially
lessened or avoided through the adoption of feasible mitigation measures or feasible
alternatives, there exist certain overriding economic, social, and other considerations for
approving the project that justify the occurrence of those impacts; and
WHEREAS, the City Council fully reviewed, considered and evaluated all the
testimony and evidence submitted in this matter and determined that a Statement of
Overriding Considerations is warranted.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of San
Rafael certifies the Final Project EIR, and makes the following findings with respect to the
Proposed Project’s significant effects on the environment as identified in the Final Project
EIR, as required under Sections 15091, 15092, and 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines, and
adopts the Statement of Overriding Considerations and the MMRP as follows:
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
As fully described in Chapter 2 of the Draft EIR, the Project includes phased construction
on the Aldersly campus, including the construction of three new buildings and
additions/renovations to existing buildings as outlined below:
PHASE 1: Build new Independent Living (IL) Building, Relocate the Campus
Reception/Entry to street level, Expand Community Space, and Improve Central
Courtyard.
Phase 1A:
• Demolish three small buildings (Liselund, Marselisborg and Graasten) containing a
total of 12 independent living, studio units.
• Demolish building at 308 Mission (currently used as office space)
Phase 1B: Add new independent living building.
• Construct new independent living 35-unit building. Includes the redesign of site entry
and parking for better accessibility for residents and visitors. (An elevator and an
interior connection to Fredensborg will enable sheltered ADA access to upper levels
on the hillside site).
• Provide nine (9) parking spaces in the new Mission Avenue IL building, five guest
parking spaces at the new main entrance, and six surface parking spaces along the
East driveway to Rosenborg.
• Expand community space with a café, rooftop lounge, arts & crafts/activity room, and
a conference room/pre-function room.
ATTACHMENT 1
3
• Improve central courtyard. Improve outdoor spaces with new gathering spaces and
landscaping, including historic elements.
PHASE 2: Service Building Addition
• Demolish the Minor Building (8 independent living units)
• Construct a new service connector building with service elevator connections to
Rosenborg and Kronborg to improve service access for delivery, refuse and
maintenance back-of-house spaces for increased efficiency.
• Expand outdoor garden for Memory Care (Rosenborg)
PHASE 3: West Campus Independent Living
• Demolish Amalienborg and Sorgenfri (14 independent living units)
• Construct new 15 independent living units in new West Campus IL building (net +1).
• Partial rebuild of Frederiksborg to increase floor area (no net change in number of IL
units). Add four new parking spaces. Interior renovation of Frendensborg (-2 net
change in number of IL units)
At buildout of the proposed PD Development Plan, (estimated to be 10 years from Project
approval, or approximately the year 2032) the Project would result in fourteen (14) net new
additional independent living units, an increase from 55 units to 69 units. The number of
Assisted Living/Memory Care beds (35 beds) and Skilled Nursing beds (20 beds) would
remain unchanged. The number of parking on-site parking spaces would increase from 48
spaces to 54 spaces at buildout of the Development Plan.
The anticipated entitlements and permits that would be needed for the Project are the
following:
• A zoning amendment to amend the previously approved Ordinance No. 1775,
including revised Aldersly PD Development Standards. (ZC20-001);
• An amendment to a master use permit (UP20-022); and
• An environmental and design review permit for Phases 1-3 (ED20-051).
A. PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The Project Sponsor has identified the following goals and objectives of the Project:
Goals:
• To keep Aldersly a boutique residential community for older people looking for a
home with hygge - Danish for the experience of coziness and comfortable
conviviality that engenders feelings of contentment and well-being.
• To allow the Aldersly Retirement Community to evolve to meet the needs of
current and future residents for the next 20 years.
Project objectives originating from these overarching goals include:
Create a financially sustainable community that will last another 100 years
Add a second dining venue and resident lounge/gathering spaces
Create a dedicated Memory Care Center with an accessible outdoor garden
area
Update Independent Living units to attract new residents. Increase number of
larger, more marketable units (average unit size in square feet)
Improve site accessibility and access to campus amenities for staff and
residents with various levels of mobility
Improve entry experience to create a positive first impression
Define a core active space for residents that promotes social interaction and
movement between different parts of the campus
Provide outdoor spaces with lush landscaping to maintain Aldersly’s long-
ATTACHMENT 1
4
time connections to nature and outdoor living, in keeping with the original
hygge spirit of the community
Provide additional parking
Improve delivery area and back of house spaces to increase efficiency and
ease access from Belle Avenue
Maximize Aldersly’s footprint, within the limits of the land use and design
controls established by the City’s planning documents
II. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
According to CEQA, lead agencies are required to consult with public agencies having
jurisdiction over a proposed project, and to provide the general public with an opportunity
to comment on the Draft EIR. An NOP for an EIR was issued by the City to the OPR State
Clearinghouse and interested agencies and persons on November 25, 2021 for a 30-day
review period, during which interested agencies and the public could submit comments
about the Project. The City also held a public scoping meeting on December 14, 2021.
Comments on the NOP were received by the City and considered during preparation of
the Draft EIR.
A Notice of Availability (NOA) of the Draft EIR was issued on August 16, 2022, and the
Draft EIR was made available for public review for a 45-day public review period through
September 30, 2022. The Draft EIR was distributed to local, regional, and State agencies
and the general public was advised of the availability of the Draft EIR.
The Responses to Comments Document provides responses to the comments received
during the comment period on the Draft EIR. The Draft EIR and the Responses to
Comments Document comprise the Final EIR. The Planning Commission was presented
with the Final EIR for consideration at a public hearing on November 15, 2022.
III. CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL EIR
Upon receiving the recommendation of the Planning Commission, in accordance with
CEQA Guidelines Section 15090, the City of San Rafael, acting by and through its City
Council will certify that the Final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA and
the CEQA Guidelines. The City will further certify that it has been presented with the Final
EIR and that it has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR
prior to approving the Project. The City will further certify that the Final EIR reflects its
independent judgment and analysis.
IV. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
For purposes of CEQA and these findings, the record of proceedings consists of the
following documents and testimony:
(a) The NOP and all other public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the
project;
(c) The Draft EIR for the Project, dated August 2022;
(d) All comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the public
comment period on the Draft EIR;
(e) The Final EIR for the Project, including comments received on the Draft EIR,
responses to those comments, and the technical appendices, dated November
2022;
ATTACHMENT 1
5
(f) The MMRP for the Project;
(h) All reports, studies, memoranda, maps, staff reports, or other planning documents
related to the Project prepared by the City, or consultants to the City, with respect
to the City’s compliance with the requirements of CEQA and with respect to the
City’s action on the Project;
(i) All documents submitted to the City (including the Planning Commission and City
Council) by other public agencies or members of the public in connection with the
Project;
(j) Any minutes and/or verbatim transcripts of all information sessions, public
meetings, and public hearings held by the City in connection with the Project;
(k) All matters of common knowledge to the Planning Commission and City Council,
including, but not limited to:
(i) City’s General Plan and other applicable policies;
(ii) City’s Zoning Ordinance and other applicable ordinances;
(iii) Information regarding the City’s fiscal status;
(iv) Applicable City policies and regulations; and
(v) Federal, state and local laws and regulations.
(l) Any other materials required for the record of proceedings by CEQA Section
21167.6(e).
The documents described above comprising the record of proceedings are located on the
City’s webpage at: https://www.cityofsanrafael.org/aldersly/. The custodian of these
documents is the City’s Community Development Director or their designee.
III. FINDINGS
The findings, recommendations, and statement of overriding considerations set forth
below (“Findings”) are to be made and adopted by the City Council of the City of San
Rafael as the City’s findings under CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines relating to the Project.
The Findings provide the written analysis and conclusions of the City Council regarding
the Project’s environmental impacts, mitigation measures, alternatives to the Project, and
the overriding considerations that support approval of the Project despite any remaining
environmental effects it may have.
These findings summarize the environmental determinations of the Final EIR with regard
to Project impacts before and after mitigation, and do not attempt to repeat the full analysis
of each environmental impact contained in the Final EIR. Instead, the findings provide a
summary description of and basis for each impact conclusion identified in the Final EIR,
describe the applicable mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR, and state the City’s
findings and rationale about the significance of each impact following the adoption of
mitigation measures. A full explanation of the environmental findings and conclusions can
be found in the Final EIR; the discussion and analysis in the Final EIR regarding mitigation
measures and the Project’s impacts is adopted by reference.
The City intends to adopt each of the mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR.
Accordingly, in the event a mitigation measure identified in the Final EIR has been
inadvertently omitted from these findings, such mitigation measure is hereby adopted and
incorporated into the Project in the findings below by reference. In addition, in the event
the language of a mitigation measure set forth below fails to accurately reflect the
mitigation measure in the Final EIR due to a clerical error, the language of the mitigation
measure as set forth in the Final EIR shall control unless the language of the mitigation
measure has been specifically and expressly modified by these findings.
ATTACHMENT 1
6
Sections IV and V, below, provide brief descriptions of the impacts that the Final EIR
identifies as either significant and unavoidable or less than significant with adopted
mitigation. These descriptions also reproduce the full text of the mitigation measures
identified in the Final EIR for each significant impact.
IV. FINDINGS FOR SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACT
The Final EIR identifies one significant and unavoidable adverse impact associated with
the approval of the Project, which can be reduced, although not to a less-than-significant
level, through implementation of mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR. As
explained below, this impact will remain significant and unavoidable notwithstanding
adoption of feasible mitigation measures. The City Council finds there are no additional
feasible mitigation measures or alternatives that could be adopted at this time that would
reduce these significant and unavoidable impacts to a less than significant level. For
reasons set forth below, however, the City Council has determined that overriding
economic, social, and other considerations outweigh the Project’s significant and
unavoidable effects. The findings in this section are based on the Project EIR, the
discussion and analysis of which is hereby incorporated in full by this reference.
A. IMPACT CUL-1: The Proposed Project would result in the demolition of
six of the nine contributing buildings and landscape features that are
contributing features of an historic resource.
The Final EIR finds that the Aldersly property is potentially eligible for listing as a historic
district in the California Register of Historic Resources (California Register) and is
therefore considered a historic resource. The Proposed Project would demolish six
contributing buildings, partially demolish one contributing building, and alter an additional
contributing building, leaving only one contributing building intact. The construction of the
three new buildings would require the removal and relocation of some landscape features
– including the Rose Garden and fountain – and would infill some of the green space of
the existing campus, including a corner of the central lawn. All landscape features of the
Aldersly campus that are contributing features of the historic resource would be altered in
some way, either through relocation, removal, or alteration.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1 set forth below, which is hereby adopted and
incorporated into the Project, would reduce these impacts, but not to a less-than-
significant level. Therefore, the impact would be significant and unavoidable.
Mitigation Measure CUL-1: Interpretation and Commemoration of Historic Resources.
Prior to issuance of demolition permit(s), the project sponsor shall undertake the following
measures to document and provide interpretation, commemoration, and salvage of the
historic resources to be demolished, as outlined below:
CUL-1a: Documentation. Prior to issuance of demolition permits, the project sponsor
shall undertake Historic American Building Survey (HABS)/Historic American
Landscape Survey (HALS)–style documentation of the property. The documentation
shall be funded by the project sponsor and undertaken by a qualified professional who
meets the standards for history, architectural history, or architecture (as appropriate)
set forth in the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards (Code of
Federal Regulations title 36, part 61). The documentation package created shall consist
of the items listed below:
• CUL-1a-1: HABS-style Photographs
• CUL-1a-2: HABS/HALS-style Historical Report
ATTACHMENT 1
7
• CUL-1a-3: HALS-style Site Plan
• CUL-1a-4: Video Documentation
The documentation materials shall be offered to state, regional, and local
repositories, including but not limited to, the Northwest Information Center (NWIC)-
California Historical Resource Information System, San Rafael Public Library, the
Marin County Free Library’s Anne T. Kent California Room, and the Marin History
Museum. Materials will either be provided in digital or hard copy formats depending
on the capacity and preference of the repository.
CUL-1a-1: HABS-style Photographs
Digital photographs will be taken of the contributing buildings and landscape
elements and the overall character and setting of the historic resource. All digital
photography shall be conducted according to current National Park Service
standards as specified in the National Register Photo Policy Factsheet (updated May
2013). The photography shall be undertaken by a qualified professional with
demonstrated experience in documentation photography. Large format negatives are
not required. The scope of the digital photographs shall be reviewed and approved
by the Planning Division’s staff for concurrence.
Photograph views for the data set shall include contextual views of the site and each
contributing landscape element and building; elevations of each façade of each
building; and detail views of character-defining features. All photographs shall be
referenced on a photographic key map or site plan. The photographic key shall show
the photograph number with an arrow to indicate the direction of the view.
CUL-1a-2: HABS/HALS-style Historical Report
A written historical narrative and report will be produced that meets the HABS/HALS
Historical Report Guidelines. This HABS/HALS-style Historical Report may be based on
the documentation provided in the 2017 Historic Resource Evaluation for the site and
will include historic photographs and drawings, if available. The written history shall
follow the standard outline format that begins with a statement of significance for the
historic district, describes the architectural and historical context of the district, and
includes descriptions of each contributing building and landscape feature.
CUL-1a-3: HALS-style Site Plan
A HALS-style site plan shall be prepared that depicts the existing sizes, scale,
dimensions, and relative locations of the contributing landscape elements and buildings
related to the historic resource. Particular attention will be paid to the arrangement and
plantings of landscape features that are contributing resources to the historic resource.
Documentation of all plantings is not required, but depiction of the locations and types
of mature trees, and designed hardscape and landscape features shall be included.
CUL-1a-4: Video Recordation. Video recordation shall be undertaken prior to the
issuance of demolition permits. The project sponsor shall undertake a video
documenting the historic resource and its setting. The documentation shall be
conducted by a professional videographer, preferably one with experience recording
architectural resources. The documentation shall be narrated by a qualified professional
who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for
history, architectural history, or architecture (as appropriate). The documentation shall
include as much information as possible—using visuals in combination with narration—
ATTACHMENT 1
8
about the materials, construction methods, current condition, historic use, historic
context, and historic significance of the historic resource. The video documentation shall
be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division’s staff prior to issuance of
demolition permits.
CUL-1b: Interpretation. The project sponsor shall provide a permanent display (or
multiple displays) of interpretive materials concerning the history of Aldersly in the
Northern California Danish-American community and the architectural features of the
Aldersly Retirement Community campus as designed in the 1961-1968 master plan by
master architect Rex Whitaker Allen. Interpretation of the site’s history shall be
supervised by an architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary of the
Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards. The high-quality interpretive display(s)
shall be installed within the project site boundaries, made of durable, all-weather
materials, and positioned to allow for high public visibility and interactivity. In addition to
narrative text, the interpretative display(s) may include, but are not limited to, a display
of photographs, news articles, memorabilia, drawings, and/or video. A proposal
describing the general parameters of the interpretive program shall be approved by the
Planning Division’s staff prior to issuance of building permits. The content, media, and
other characteristics of the interpretive display shall be approved by the Planning
Division’s staff prior to issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy.
CUL-1c: Salvage. Prior to any demolition or construction activities that would remove
character-defining features of a resource that is a contributor to the historic resource on
the project site, the project sponsor shall consult with a qualified architectural historian
or historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification
Standards as to whether any such features may be salvaged, in whole or in part, during
demolition/alteration. The project sponsor shall submit a list of materials that will be
salvaged and reused either on the site or within the interpretive program to the Planning
Division for review prior to the beginning of demolition on the site. The project sponsor
shall make a good faith effort to salvage materials of historical interest to be utilized as
part of the interpretative program. No materials shall be salvaged or removed until
HABS/HALS-style recordation and documentation are completed.
Significance with Mitigation: Significant and Unavoidable. While the Project proposes
to relocate some of the character-defining features and contributing elements of the
landscape, and Mitigation Measure CUL-1 would lessen the impact associated with the
proposed project; it would not reduce the impact to a less-than- significant level. The historic
resource would lose its integrity and ability to convey its significance. Therefore, the impact
on the historic resource would be significant and unavoidable.
V. FINDINGS FOR SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS REDUCED TO A LESS-THAN-
SIGNIFICANT LEVEL BY MITIGATION MEASURES
The Final EIR identifies the following significant impacts associated with the Project. It is
hereby determined that the impacts addressed through the corresponding mitigation
measures will be reduced to a less than significant level or avoided by adopting and
incorporating these mitigation measures into the Project. As explained in Section VII,
below, the findings in Section V are based on the Final EIR, including the discussion and
analysis contained in Appendix B of which is incorporated in full by this reference, and as
identified in the Summary Chapter, Table S-1, Summary of Impacts and Mitigation
Measures of the Final EIR and supported by evidence contained within the entirety of the
record of proceedings.
ATTACHMENT 1
9
A. IMPACT CUL-2: Implementation of the Proposed Project has the potential to
cause a significant impact to a previously unidentified archaeological resource
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5.
B. IMPACT CUL-3: Ground-disturbing activities during Project construction could
encounter human remains, the disturbance of which could result in a significant
impact under CEQA. (Less than Significant with Mitigation)
C. IMPACT TCR-1: Ground-disturbing activities as a result of the Proposed Project
could encounter Tribal Cultural Resources, the disturbance of which could
result in a significant impact under CEQA.
As discussed in Chapter 3 and summarized in Table S-1 in the Summary Chapter of the
Final EIR, although construction of the proposed project would have no impact on known
tribal cultural resources, there is a possibility that previously unidentified resources and
subsurface deposits are present within the Project area. Implementation of Mitigation
Measure TCR-1, which requires a survey of the site by trained Human Remains Detection
Dogs, would avoid or reduce this impact to a less-than- significant level.
D. IMPACT AQ-1. The project could result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase a criteria pollutant for which the project region is non – attainment
under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (Appendix B -
Checklist Item III.b.).
As discussed in Appendix B, Topics Not Requiring Detailed Environmental Analysis and
summarized in Table S-1 in the Summary Chapter of the Final EIR, the project could result
in a cumulatively considerable net increase a criteria pollutant for which the project region
is non – attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1, which requires BAAQMD Best
Management Practices (BMPs) be implemented during construction would avoid or
reduce this impact to a less-than- significant level.
E. IMPACT AQ-2. The project could expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations (Appendix B - Checklist Item III.c.)
As discussed in Appendix B, Topics Not Requiring Detailed Environmental Analysis and
summarized in Table S-1 in the Summary Chapter of the Final EIR, the project could
expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Implementation of
Mitigation Measure AQ-2, which requires construction equipment to minimize exhaust
emissions would avoid or reduce this impact to a less-than- significant level.
F. IMPACT BIO-1. The project has the potential to disturb active bird nests on the
Project site. (Checklist Item IV.a.).
As discussed in Appendix B, Topics Not Requiring Detailed Environmental Analysis and
summarized in Table S-1 in the Summary Chapter of the Final EIR, the project has the
potential to disturb active bird nests during construction. Implementation of Mitigation
Measure BIO-1, which requires avoidance of nesting birds in compliance with State and
federal regulations, would avoid or reduce this impact to a less-than- significant level.
As discussed in the Final EIR Response to Comments from California Department of Fish
ATTACHMENT 1
10
and Wildlife (CDFW), no bats or indicators of on-site roosting (e.g., guano/staining) were
observed by the biologist during their site visit. For these reasons, bats (including special-
status species) are unlikely to roost on the project site. Though not required, the following
measures recommended by CDFW are adopted and included in the MMRP:
Mitigation Measure BIO-2 (Roosting Bat Habitat Assessment and Surveys):
Prior to any tree removal, a qualified biologist shall conduct a habitat assessment for
bats. A qualified bat biologist shall have: 1) at least two years of experience
conducting bat surveys that resulted in detections for relevant species, such as pallid
bat, with verified project names, dates, and references, and 2) experience with
relevant equipment used to conduct bat surveys. The habitat assessment shall be
conducted a minimum of 30 to 90 days prior to tree removal and shall include a
visual inspection of potential roosting features (e.g., cavities, crevices in wood and
bark, exfoliating bark, suitable canopy for foliage roosting species). If suitable habitat
trees are found, or bats are observed, mitigation measure BIO-3 shall be
implemented.
Mitigation Measure BIO-3 (Roosting Bat Tree Protections): If the qualified
biologist identifies potential bat habitat trees, then tree trimming and tree removal
shall not proceed unless the following occurs: 1) a qualified biologist conducts night
emergence surveys or completes visual examination of roost features that
establishes absence of roosting bats, or 2) tree trimming and tree removal occurs
only during seasonal periods of bat activity, from approximately March 1 through
April 15 and September 1 through October 15, and tree removal occurs using the
two-step removal process. Two-step tree removal shall be conducted over two
consecutive days. The first day (in the afternoon), under the direct supervision and
instruction by a qualified biologist with experience conducting two-step tree removal,
limbs and branches shall be removed by a tree cutter using chainsaws only; limbs
with cavities, crevices or deep bark fissures shall be avoided. The second day the
entire tree shall be removed.
G. IMPACT GEO-1. The project site is subject to earthquakes that have the potential
to induce strong to very strong ground shaking. Strong shaking during an
earthquake can result in ground failure such as that associated with soil
liquefaction, lateral spreading, cyclic densification, and landsliding. (Checklist
Item VII.a.ii)
As discussed in Appendix B, Topics Not Requiring Detailed Environmental Analysis and
summarized in Table S-1 in the Summary Chapter of the Final EIR, the project could.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1, which requires that seismic design
coefficients and spectral accelerations shall be consistent with the findings presented in
Geotechnical Investigation prepared by Rockridge Geotechnical, August 31, 2020, and
that a final geotechnical investigation be prepared by a qualified and licensed geotechnical
engineer would avoid or reduce this impact to a less-than- significant level.
H. IMPACT GEO-2. The project has the potential to destroy a unique
paleontological resource during construction and earthmoving activities
(Checklist Item VII.f.)
As discussed in Appendix B, Topics Not Requiring Detailed Environmental Analysis and
summarized in Table S-1 in the Summary Chapter of the Final EIR, the project project
ATTACHMENT 1
11
has the potential to destroy a unique paleontological resource during construction and
earthmoving activities. Implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-2, which establishes
protocols in the event that fossils or other paleontological resources are encountered
during project subsurface construction, would avoid or reduce this impact to a less-than-
significant level.
I. IMPACT NOI-1. Noise generated by construction activities, including
demolition, could exceed the 90 dBA Leq noise level established in SRMC
Section 8.13.050
As discussed in Appendix B, Topics Not Requiring Detailed Environmental Analysis and
summarized in Table S-1 in the Summary Chapter of the Final EIR, noise generated by
project construction activities, including demolition, could exceed the 90 dBA Leq noise
level established in the San Rafael Municipal Code. Implementation of Mitigation
Measure NOI-1, which requires that a Construction Noise Management Plan (CNMP)
prepared by a qualified acoustical consultant to identify noise attenuation measures,
including but not limited to installing temporary noise barriers, would reduce this impact to
a less-than- significant level.
VI. ALTERNATIVES
The Final EIR analyzed three alternatives to the Project. The Project objectives are listed
in Chapter 2 (Project Description) of the Draft EIR; the potentially significant environmental
effects of the Project, including feasible mitigation measures identified to avoid these
impacts, are analyzed in Chapter 3 of the Draft EIR; and the alternatives are described in
detail in Chapter 5 (Alternatives to the Proposed Project) of the Draft EIR.
Brief summaries of the alternatives are provided below. A brief discussion of the
Environmentally Superior Alternative follows the summaries of the alternatives. As
explained in Section VII, below, the findings in this Section VI are based on the Final EIR,
the discussion and analysis in which is hereby incorporated in full by this reference.
1. Alternative 1: No Project Alternative:
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(1), the No Project Alternative is required
as part of the “reasonable range of alternatives” to allow decision makers to compare the
impacts of approving the proposed project with the impacts of taking no action or not
approving the proposed project. Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section
15126.6(e)(3)(B), when the project is a development project on identifiable property, the “no
project” alternative is the circumstance under which the project does not proceed.
Under Alternative 1, the Aldersly campus would remain in its existing condition and would
not be subject to redevelopment. Aldersly would continue to operate as it currently exists
and no new construction would occur within the Project site, except for repairs and interior
renovations to existing buildings. The number of Independent Living units, assisted
living/memory care beds and skilled nursing beds would be essentially unchanged (55
Independent Living units, 35 Assisted Living/Memory Care beds, and 20 Skilled Nursing
beds).
A. Comparison of Environmental Impacts: There would be no redevelopment of
Aldersly’s campus under Alternative 1. Aldersly would continue to operate as is
which would include ongoing minor repairs and renovations of existing buildings.
ATTACHMENT 1
12
The Aldersly campus would remain eligible for listing in the California Register and
there would be no other environmental impacts under this alternative.
B. Facts in Support of Finding: Alternative 1 would not meet the Project’s overarching
goals or objectives. Under this alternative, Aldersly would not add or update existing
independent living units, construct a dedicated outdoor garden for the Memory Care
Center or other outdoor spaces for connecting with nature, create a core active space
to promote social interaction, or add a second dining venue and resident
lounge/gathering spaces. These objectives are necessary for meeting the Project’s
overarching goals of maintaining Aldersly as a boutique residential community for
older adults while providing the flexibility to evolve to meet the current and future
needs of residents. These objectives would also ensure that Aldersly remains a
financially sustainable community for the foreseeable future. The new and updated
independent living units responds to changing market demand for older adult
independent living and is therefore needed to attract new residents. The dedicated
outdoor garden would enhance Aldersly’s new and innovative Memory Care Center.
The improved outdoor spaces, new core active space, and second dining venue and
resident lounge/gathering spaces provide additional amenities to retain and attract
new residents.
Alternative 1 would also not meet the objectives of improving site accessibility for
staff and residents, providing additional parking, or maximizing Aldersly’s
development footprint within established land use and design controls for the Project
site. Overall, under Alternative 1, there would be uncertainty as to whether Aldersly
may be redeveloped and modernized to ensure its ongoing and future viability as a
non-profit community for older adults.
C. Finding: Accordingly, City Council hereby finds Alternative 1 to be infeasible for the
preceding policy, social, and economic reasons and because it would not satisfy the
Project’s objectives. Each of these reasons would separately and independently
provide sufficient justification for rejecting Alternative 1
2. Alternative 2: On-Site Preservation Alternative:
Alternative 2 would limit redevelopment to the southern edge of the Aldersly campus.
Marselisborg, Graasten, and Liselund, all of which are contributing buildings to the historic
resource, would be demolished and replaced with a new building fronting Mission Avenue
that would include a parking garage, administrative space, and 35 independent living units.
Frederiksborg would also be demolished and replaced with a two-story building containing
ground floor indoor parking and six independent living units. As with the Project, many of
the contributing landscape features of the historic resource would be relocated, altered, or
removed to accommodate the independent living building along Mission Avenue. The
Minor Building would be demolished and replaced with the outdoor garden for the Memory
Care Center. The new service connector building would not be constructed between
Rosenborg and Kronborg. Alternative 2 would also not construct the independent living
building in the northwest portion of the campus thereby preserving contributing buildings
Amalienborg and Sorgenfri. In total, four of the nine contributing buildings would be
demolished. The net increase of residential and administrative space under Alternative 2
would be 53,390 sq. ft. and the average size of the independent living units would be 830
sq. ft.
A. Comparison of Environmental Impacts: Since Alternative 2 proposes less
development than the Project, net increase of 53,390 sq. ft. versus the Project’s net
ATTACHMENT 1
13
increase of 64,260 sq. ft., this smaller project would generally reduce the Project’s
environmental effects to some degree. For example, air quality, greenhouse gas
emissions, noise, and biological resource impacts would be reduced due to there
being less construction (although these impacts are less than significant for both the
Project and Alternative 2). Alternative 2 would also reduce the impact to the historic
resource but the impact would remain significant and unavoidable. Even though an
additional two contributing buildings would be preserved, the Project site would still
lose its historic integrity and ability to convey its significance due to demolition of
four of the nine contributing buildings and relocating, altering, or removing most of
the contributing landscape features.
B. Facts in Support of Finding: Alternative 2 meets some but not all of the Project’s
objectives. For instance, the alternative would add a second dining venue, create a
dedicated outdoor garden for the Memory Care center, and define a core active
space for residents to promote social interaction. The alternative would add
independent living units and increase their overall size, but not to the extent the
Project would (830 sq. ft. in Alternative 2 compared to 968 sq. ft. in the Project).
These smaller independent living units would be less attractive to potential new
residents and so the alternative falls short of the objective to ensure Aldersly can
operate in a financially sustainably manner for the foreseeable future. The
alternative also would not maximize Aldersly’s development footprint within existing
land use controls. Furthermore, Alternative 2 would not meet the objectives of
improving site accessibility as construction would be focused solely in the southern
portion of campus. The desired improvements to the delivery area and back of
house spaces with a connector building between Rosenborg and Kronborg would
not be constructed.
Although Alternative 2 would further reduce the Project’s less than significant
impacts, the impact to the historic resource would remain significant and
unavoidable as four of the nine contributing buildings would be demolished and the
majority of contributing landscape features would be relocated, altered, or removed.
C. Finding: Accordingly, the City Council hereby finds Alternative 2 to be infeasible for
the preceding policy, social, and economic reasons and because it would not satisfy
the Project’s objectives. Each of these reasons would separately and independently
provide sufficient justification for rejecting Alternative 2.
3. Alternative 3: Off-Site Alternative
Alternative 3 would locate all new development on the eastern end of the Aldersly campus
and on two parcels owned by Aldersly (121 and 123 Union Street) adjacent to the northeast
corner of campus at Belle Avenue and Union Street. The only contributing buildings that
would be demolished under Alternative 3 are the Minor Building and Liselund. Seven
contributing buildings and seven contributing landscape features would remain intact.
Rosenborg, a non-contributing building constructed in 2004 that currently houses assisted
living and memory care facilities and Liselund would be demolished and replaced with a
new building with two to four stories spanning from the two adjacent parcels on Union Street
down to Mission Avenue. This new building would accommodate 41 parking spaces, 15
assisted living units, 15 memory care units, and 42 independent living units. The Minor
Building would be replaced with an outdoor landscaped area. As Rosenborg contains a
parking garage with 30 spaces, the majority of on-site parking spaces would be temporarily
eliminated during the construction process. The net increase of residential and
administrative space under Alternative 3 would be 46,730 sq. ft. and the average size of the
ATTACHMENT 1
14
independent living units would be 764 sq. ft.
A. Comparison of Environmental Impacts: Alternative 3 would retain the majority
of the buildings and landscaping elements that contribute to the historic district
thereby reducing the significant impact to less than significant. Accordingly, the
campus would retain its eligibility for the California Register. Alternative 3 would
result in a net increase of 46,730 sq. ft. of residential and administrative space
whereas the Project would increase residential and administrative space by 64,260
sq. ft. As such, construction related environmental impacts under Alternative 3 may
be somewhat reduced. However, some construction impacts will be increased. In
particular, development on the two adjacent parcels will be in closer proximity to
existing single family homes on Belle Avenue and Union Street, as compared to
the Project, which could increase air quality and noise impacts. Alternative 3 would
also require more earthwork than the Project, although with implementation of
BMPs, a construction management plan, and compliance with the noise ordinance,
impacts would remain less than significant.
B. Facts in Support of Finding: Alternative 3 meets some but not all of the Project
objectives. The new building replacing Rosenborg would include a second dining
venue and gathering/lounge spaces and the Minor Building would be replaced with
the outdoor garden for the Memory Care Center. The alternative would provide
larger independent units than exist today, but the average unit size would be even
smaller than the independent living units under Alternative 2 and therefore be less
marketable to potential residents. This would impact Aldersly’s ability to remain a
financially sustainable community.
Alternative 3 would also require demolishing Rosenborg which is a relatively new
building constructed in 2004 and was remodeled in the past year to house
Aldersly’s state-of-the art Memory Care Center and assisted living facilities.
Rosenborg, as recently upgraded, was a major investment by Aldersly and
demolishing it well before the end of its useful life would add significant costs not
accounted for and is likely a financially infeasible option. Demolishing Rosenborg
would be impractical and may not be an option that the California Department of
Social Services (“CDSS”) would approve. As a licensed Residential Care Facility
for the Elderly, Aldersly is required to obtain approval from CDSS for major
modifications to its facilities. Since Rosenborg houses both the Memory Care
Center and assisted living facilities, demolishing it would require displacing and
temporarily relocating up to 35 residents across both programs. Relocating these
residents on campus would be extremely challenging given the constraints of
existing facilities combined with construction of the project and the special
requirements and needs of these residents. It would also be very disruptive since
these residents have medical conditions requiring stable, routine, and consistent
care. As such, Alternative 3 may be infeasible because it would be impractical and
disruptive to temporarily relocate up to 35 assisted living and memory care
residents and may not receive approval from CDSS.
Alternative 3 also would not improve site accessibility and access to campus
amenities, define a core active space for residents, or provide additional parking
spaces, all of which are Project objectives. In fact, the number of overall parking
spaces would be reduced by three. The alternative would also not make the most
of Aldersly’s development footprint, opting to instead expand onto the adjacent
parcels which would require rezoning. Development on the two parcels would
result in additional impacts to the adjacent neighbors on Belle Avenue and Union
ATTACHMENT 1
15
Street. The new building replacing Rosenborg would be taller and have greater
massing and would therefore further impact the views and shadows of the single-
family homes situated on Union Street and directly east of the campus.
C. Finding: Accordingly, the City Council hereby finds Alternative 3 to be infeasible
for the preceding legal, social, economic, and other considerations and because it
would not satisfy the Project’s objectives. Each of the reasons described above
would separately and independently provide sufficient justification for rejecting
Alternative 3.
4. ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE
The CEQA Guidelines (Section 15126.6(e)) require the identification of an environmentally
superior alternative to the Proposed Project. If it is determined that the “no project” alternative
would be the environmentally superior alternative, then the EIR shall also identify an
environmentally superior alternative among the other project alternatives (Section
15126.6[e][2]). To determine the environmentally superior alternative, the impacts of all the
alternatives were compared to determine which alternative would have the least adverse
effects. Alternative 1, the “no project” alternative, is the environmentally superior alternative
to the Proposed Project because it would avoid all of the significant impacts associated with
the Proposed Project.
Alternative 3 would retain the majority of the buildings and landscaping elements that
contribute to the historic resource thereby reducing the significant impact to the historic
resource to less than significant. However, as noted above, Alternative 3 would meet fewer
of the project sponsor’s objectives. The new building replacing Rosenborg would include a
second dining venue and gathering/lounge spaces and the Minor Building would be replaced
with the outdoor garden for the Memory Care Center. The alternative would provide larger
independent units than exist today, but the average unit size would be even smaller than the
independent living units under Alternative 2 and therefore be less marketable to potential
residents. This would impact Aldersly’s ability to remain a financially sustainable community.
Alternative 3 would also require demolishing Rosenborg which is a relatively new building
constructed in 2004 and was remodeled in the past year to house Aldersly’s state-of-the art
Memory Care Center and assisted living facilities. Rosenborg, as recently upgraded, was a
major investment by Aldersly and demolishing it well before the end of its useful life would
add significant costs not accounted for and is likely a financially infeasible option. As noted
above, demolishing Rosenborg may not be an option that the California Department of Social
Services (“CDSS”) would approve. As a licensed Residential Care Facility for the Elderly,
Aldersly is required to obtain approval from CDSS for major modifications to its
facilities. Since Rosenborg houses both the Memory Care Center and assisted living
facilities, demolishing it would require displacing and temporarily relocating up to 35 residents
across both programs. Relocating these residents on campus would be extremely
challenging given the constraints of existing facilities combined with construction of the
project and the special requirements and needs of these residents. It would also be very
disruptive since these residents have medical conditions requiring stable, routine, and
consistent care. As such, Alternative 3 may be infeasible because it would be impractical
and disruptive to temporarily relocate up to 35 assisted living and memory care residents and
may not receive approval from CDSS. Alternative 3 also would not improve site accessibility
and access to campus amenities, define a core active space for residents, or provide
additional parking spaces, all of which are Project objectives.
ATTACHMENT 1
16
VII. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
As stated above and determined in the foregoing findings, the City has determined that the
Project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact to an historic resource and there
is no feasible mitigation or alternative to reduce the impact to less than significant. The City
has determined all other impacts to be less than significant.
Section 15093(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines provides that when the decision of the public
agency results in the occurrence of significant impacts that are not avoided or substantially
lessened, the agency must state in writing the reasons to support its actions (see also Public
Resources Code Section 21081(b)). Accordingly, the City Council specifically adopts and
makes this Statement of Overriding Considerations. The Project has mitigated the
significant impacts on the historic resource to the extent feasible and finds that the remaining
significant and unavoidable impact is acceptable in light of the economic, legal,
environmental, social, technological, or other considerations described below because the
benefits of the Project outweigh its significant adverse environmental effect, and that the
adverse environmental effect is therefore acceptable.
The City Council finds that each of the overriding considerations set forth below is a separate
and independent basis for finding that the benefits of the Project outweigh its significant and
unavoidable impact and warrants approval of the Project. Based on the substantial evidence
in the record, including the public record of proceedings as well as oral and written testimony
at all public hearings on the Project to date, the City Council hereby determines that
implementation of the Project would result in the following substantial benefits:
1. Promote City Goals and Policies: The Project promotes the following goals and
policies of the City’s General Plan:
a. Goal EDI-6: An Age-Friendly Community. Enhance the quality of life for older
adults in San Rafael.
The Project supports the City’s goal of serving older adults and enhancing their
quality of life. The new and expanded independent living units and other
improvements would attract new residents and enhance the living experience of
existing residents. The second dining venue, lounge and gathering spaces, and
core active space would provide additional areas for residents to meet and
socialize. The outdoor garden for the Memory Care Center and other outdoor
experiences would elevate the campus’ outdoor living experience. The site
accessibility improvements would make it easier for residents to move about the
campus.
b. Policy H-13: Senior Housing. Encourage housing that meets the needs of San
Rafael’s older population, particularly affordable units and affordable care
facilities that foster aging within the community. Support development that
provides housing options so that seniors can find suitable housing to rent or
purchase.
The Project would result in a net increase of fourteen (14) independent living
units for seniors (from 55 units to 69 units) and would continue to provide 35
assisted living/memory care beds and 20 skilled nursing beds. In response to
market demand, the new and remodeled Independent Living units would be
larger than Aldersly’s existing independent living units and include amenities
such as a full kitchen and in-unit washer and dryer. Independent living units
ATTACHMENT 1
17
provide older adults the option to live in a supported community with the
experience of living on their own. These independent living units are also an
option for older adults seeking to downsize from their single-family homes.
c. Policy LU-1.3: Land Use and Climate Change. Focus future housing and
commercial development in areas where alternatives to driving are most viable
and shorter trip lengths are possible, especially around transit stations, near
services, and on sites with frequent bus service. This can reduce the
greenhouse gas emissions associated with motor vehicle trips and support the
City’s climate action goals.
Policy M-3.8: Land Use and VMT: Encourage higher-density employment and
residential uses near major transit hubs such as Downtown San Rafael,
recognizing the potential for VMT reduction in areas where there are attractive
alternatives to driving, concentrations of complementary activities, and
opportunities for shorter trips between different uses
The Project would increase the overall density of the Aldersly campus with 35
modernized and larger independent living units and other amenities such as
the second dining venue and lounge/gathering spaces. The Project is within
one half mile of the San Rafael Transit Center which is served by SMART,
Marin Transit, Golden Gate Transit, and Sonoma County Transit, and is near
commercial and retail uses in Montecito Plaza downtown San Rafael.
d. Policy EV-3.3: Economically Productive Use of Land. Encourage the use of the
City’s commercial and industrial land supply in a way that creates positive fiscal
impacts, economic opportunities for local businesses and property owners,
employment growth, and services for San Rafael residents.
The Project makes the most of the development potential of the Aldersly
campus. The modernized and larger independent living units and other
improvements would ensure that Aldersly can operate sustainably as a non-
profit into the future and continue to provide a home for older adults and retain
its employees.
2. Increase Opportunities for Older Adults to Remain in the Community: The
Project would provide a total of 35 modernized and larger independent living units
designed to meet the current and future needs of older adults in the City and the
region. Marin County has the highest median age of any County in the Bay Area
and it is projected that persons over 65 will be the fastest growing population during
the time horizon of the City’s 2040 General Plan. Overall trends show that more
people are growing into their 80s and beyond thereby increasing demand for
community and assisted living. A significant benefit of the Project is to expand
opportunities for older adults to remain in the community.
3. Ensure Financial Stability for Aldersly in the Long-Term: The Project would
ensure that Aldersly remains a financially sustainable non-profit community for the
foreseeable future. Older adults are not looking for housing that met their parents’
needs. To meet the market demand of today’s older adults, Aldersly needs to
increase the overall size of its independent living units and offer amenities such as
full kitchens, in-unit laundry, open floor plans, and larger windows that allow in more
natural light. These upgrades are needed to ensure that Aldersly can remain
competitive and operate at financially sustainably. Not pursuing these
ATTACHMENT 1
18
improvements would threaten the long-term viability Aldersly. Aldersly is an
important part of the San Rafael community, so a key benefit of the Project is
ensuring its long-term financial stability.
4. Maintain and Enhance the Aldersly Experience: The Project would maintain and
enhance Aldersly as a boutique residential community for older people with an over
100-year history as a contributing and valued member of the San Rafael community.
Aldersly is known for its long-time connection to nature and outdoor living in keeping
with the original hygee (Danish for the experience of coziness and comfortable
conviviality that engenders feelings of contentment and well-being) spirit of its
community. The Project would enhance the outdoor living experience for residents
by establishing an accessible dedicated outdoor garden area for the Memory Care
Center, improving the other outdoor spaces on campus with lush landscaping, and
creating a core active space for residents that promotes social interaction and
movement around the campus. The second dining venue and resident
lounge/gathering spaces would provide additional space for residents to gather and
socialize in an inviting and comfortable setting. The campus is also difficult to traverse
due to its hillside location. The Project would address this issue by improving overall
site accessibility including ADA improvements. Given Aldersly’s long history within
the San Rafael community, a key benefit of the Project is maintaining and enhancing
the unique and special Aldersly experience.
5. Efficient Development that Respects the Existing Neighborhood: The Project
would provide much needed senior housing within Aldersly’s existing development
footprint. The Aldersly campus is located within the Montecito/Happy Valley
Neighborhood which is one of San Rafael’s oldest neighborhoods and is adjacent to
downtown San Rafael. The neighborhood consists of a mixture of residential, retail,
and community services. Aldersly is situated in a transitional area from retail and
community services uses to single family homes. The Project efficiently uses existing
developed land to redevelop Aldersly while maintaining the balance of land uses and
layout of development in this established neighborhood. For instance, the Project’s
largest building, the independent living building fronting Mission Avenue is oriented
towards existing commercial and multi-family land uses and away from, to the extent
possible, nearby single-family homes.
6. Development of an Existing and Transit-Adjacent Site: The Project would
redevelop portions of Aldersly’s campus which is located in an urbanized area of the
City directly adjacent to downtown San Rafael and within a half a mile of the San
Rafael Transit Center. Development near transit provides a number of environmental
benefits particularly by reducing air quality and greenhouse gas emissions by
reducing overall vehicle trips. Transit oriented development can also lead better to
social and health outcomes, encouraging people to walk, ride their bikes, and/or use
public transit. Projects located near transit can also contribute to reducing vehicle
traffic congestion. Transit oriented development also naturally encourages more
connected communities by concentrating development around transit locations. As
such, a key benefit of the Project is its proximity to transit which provides the
additional benefits discussed above.
VIII. ADOPTION OF THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORITNG PROGRAM
The City Council adopts the mitigation measures set forth for the Project in the Final EIR and the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) attached hereto as Exhibit A and
ATTACHMENT 1
19
incorporated herein by this reference.
IX. SEVERABILITY
If any term, provision, or portion of these findings or the application of these findings to a
particular situation is held by a court to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining
provisions of these findings, or their application to other actions related to the Project, shall
continue in full force and effect unless amended or modified by the City.
I, Lindsay Lara, Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was
duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
San Rafael, held on Monday, the 5th day of December 2022 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Councilmembers: Bushey, Hill, Kertz, Llorens Gulati & Mayor Kate
NOES: Councilmembers: None
ABSENT: Councilmembers: None
Lindsay Lara, City Clerk
Exhibit A – Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
ATTACHMENT 2
EXHIBIT A
ZONE CHANGE MAP
Existing Zoning = PD (1775)
Proposed Zoning = PD (TBD)
PD(1775)
PD(TBD)
1
EXHIBIT B
PD Zoning and Master Plan and Development Standards for Aldersly
The Planned Development (PD) zoning and Master Plan for the Aldersly campus will allow the
Aldersly Retirement Community to evolve to meet the needs of current and future residents for
the next 20 years.
Site Description & Setting
The Aldersly is a lifespan residential community, providing independent and assistive live, and
rehabilitative care and skilled nursing. The campus occupies 2.9 acres on the north side of Mission
Avenue and extending to Belle Avenue to the north. The property slopes uphill from Mission
Avenue frontage (13-16 ft. elevation) to Belle Avenue (40-60 ft. elevation). The campus is
developed with residential, administrative, and healthcare buildings connected by an extensive
network of landscaped pedestrian paths and gardens. The campus is located within the Montecito/
Happy Valley Neighborhood, one of San Rafael's oldest neighborhoods, close to Downtown San
Rafael. The area surrounding the Aldersly campus contains a mix of residential, retail, and
community services. The site has a General Plan Land Use designation as High Density
Residential and is zoned PD - Planned Development. The PD zoning prior to this Master Plan
was Ordinance No. 1775.
The PD provides the Aldersly Board a plan with the flexibility to meet future needs of its residents
with facilities providing best design and practices in services and environments. This plan includes
a combination of improvements to campus connectivity, renovations to current facilities,
expansion of some buildings, and new construction. The overall goal of the Master Plan is to
keep Aldersly a boutique residential community for older people looking for a home with hygge –
Danish for the experience of coziness and comfortable conviviality that engenders feelings of
contentment and well-being.
To this end, the PD proposes the following standards to enable sustainability of the residential
community and improvements to the unique design of Aldersly.
A. Land Uses
Consistent with the High Density Residential land use district, the following use are
allowed in the Aldersly Planned District (similar to the high density zoning categories):
• Independent living units for older adults (60 and older)
• Assisted living units for older adults (housing for people needed assistance with activities
of daily living)
• Memory care units for older adults with dementia
• Skilled nursing facility with clinic and rehabilitative services
• Ancillary support to serve residents' needs (e.g., laundry, beauty, dining, retail, recreation
facility, community meeting rooms, food service, healthcare, hospice, storage buildings)
• Administrative services (offices, maintenance, landscaping)
• Any substantive change in use of existing buildings on the site shall require an
amendment to the Master Use Permit.
B. Minimum Lot Area
The minimum lot area is 6,000 square feet (same as the HR1.8 zoning district).
2
C. Minimum Lot Area per Dwelling Unit
The Aldersly campus is approved to include:
• 69 independent living units for older adults
• 35 assisted living/memory care units for older adults
• 20 skilled nursing beds
D. Minimum Lot Width
Because of the existing configuration of campus and its compact, high-density character, no
minimum lot width is established.
E. Setbacks/Minimum Yards
• Maintain a fifteen-foot (15’) front yard building setback along Mission Avenue, (same as
the HR1.8 zoning district).
• Maintain a five-foot (5’) side yard building setback.
• Maintain a five-foot (5’) rear yard building setback along Belle Avenue, (same as the
HR1.8 zoning district).
• Existing Conditions. Buildings existing at the time this Master Plan is adopted and not
meeting the setback standards established above shall be considered conforming
buildings.
F. Distance Between Residential Structures
Provide and maintain building separations that conform to codes governing the Aldersly
campus at the time of construction permitting.
G. Maximum Height of Structures
The maximum height of structures is 36 feet (36') except where allowed per the City Zoning
definitions, exceptions, or height bonus regulations.
Existing Conditions: Buildings existing at the time this plan is adopted and not meeting the height
standards established above shall be considered conforming buildings.
H. Maximum Lot Coverage
Total building footprints on the campus shall not exceed 60% of the campus land area (same as
the HR1.8 zoning district).
I. Minimum Usable Outdoor Area per Dwelling Unit
Each resident has access to a private usable outdoor area of variable size (for independent living
units) and/or to communal outdoor areas (for assisted living/memory care and skilled nursing
residents). Because of the extensive outdoor areas provided for all residents, no minimum is
established for usable outdoor area per dwelling unit.
J. Landscaping/Yard Areas
3
i. Landscaping and yard areas requirements are not established due to the single ownership of
the campus, the communal nature of exterior areas, and the desire to maintain planning
flexibility.
ii. Open Space: The campus pattern of tightly landscaped pathways, terraces, open courtyards
and decks, and garden areas will be replicated to the extent feasible as approved through
design review.
K. Parking
Aldersly was built before the prevalence of automobiles, and the campus' topography severely
limits parking opportunities on campus. The Master Plan reflects the goals of the campus design
to maximize landscaping onsite. For these reasons, the PD standards provide substantial
flexibility.
i. Parking Capacity.
Parking will be provided consistent with the Parking Study and recommendations. There are
currently 48 spaces on site. Up to eight (8) additional spaces will be provided. At buildout, there
will be a maximum of 56 on-site parking spaces.
Additional parking, such as a valet parking program for special events, will be implemented as
needed, consistent with the Use Permit.
ii. Parking Space Dimensions
Parking space dimensions shall comply with City standards.
iii. Allowable Compact Spaces
The allowable percentage of compact spaces shall comply with City standards.
L. Parking Lot Screening
i. Parking Visible from Public Right of Way
Parking visible from a public right of way shall be screened in accordance with the requirements
contained in San Rafael’s Zoning Ordinance.
ii. Parking Adjacent to Neighboring Lots
Maintain a three-foot (3’) side yard setback of landscaped buffer between parking and circulation
areas and adjacent lots. To maximize parking and accessibility and where a 3’ setback is not
practical, a 0’ setback applies and a minimum five foot (5’) solid barrier shall be provided for
screening along the lot line.
iii. Canopy Trees at Parking
One tree for every four spaces will be provided within parking areas or at an alternate location as
close to the parking area as feasible. Flexibility in the location of the trees is required in order to
maximize the parking available. Innovative strategies for locating trees within parking areas
without diminishing parking capacity will be implemented.
iv. Planting Areas between Spaces
No planting areas will be provided between parking spaces due to the need to maximize on-site
parking. Alternate strategies for landscaping the parking areas will be implemented as feasible.
4
M. Off-Street Loading and Unloading
A new off-street truck loading and unloading area will be provided for the campus along Belle
Avenue, as shown on sheet A3.5 in the approved plans.
N. Phasing Plan
There are three phases to the Master Plan to implement Aldersly’s vision:
PHASE 1 Build new Independent Living Building, Relocate the Campus Reception/Entry
to street level, Expand Community Space, and Improve Central Courtyard.
Phase 1A Add new independent living building.
1. Remove independent 12-studio units in three small buildings (Liselund, Marselisborg and
Graasten)
2. Construct new independent living 35-unit building. Includes the relocation of Aldersly’s main
entrance and administrative offices to street level on Mission Avenue for better accessibility
for residents and visitors. (An elevator and an interior connection to Fredensborg will enable
sheltered ADA access to upper levels on the hillside site.)
3. Provide nine parking spaces in the new building, five guest parking spaces at the new main
entrance, and up to eight (8) surface parking spaces along the driveway to Rosenborg.
Implement a parking management program (i.e., shared car services, event valet parking and
stacked parking).
4. Expand community space with a café, rooftop lounge, arts & crafts/activity room, and a
conference room/pre-function room.
Phase 1B: New entry courtyard and outdoor amenity.
1. Improve central courtyard. Improve outdoor spaces with new gathering spaces and
landscaping, including historic elements.
PHASE 2 Add new service connector/facility.
Phase 2: Construct new service building.
1. Remove 8-unit independent living Minor Building.
2. Construct a new service building, with service elevator connections to Rosenborg and Kronborg
to improve service access for delivery, refuse and maintenance back-of-house spaces for
increased efficiency.
3. Provide new trash room within service building with access to Belle Avenue.
4. Expand Memory Care garden on Minor building site.
PHASE 3 West Campus Independent Living
Phase 3A: Add new independent living buildings.
1. Remove 14 units independent living units in two buildings (Amalienborg and
Sorgenfri).
2. Construct 15 independent living units in new building.
Phase 3B: Renovate 4 independent living units (Frederiksborg). Remove and replace four other
independent living units (Frederickborg). Add four new parking parking spaces.
5
Design review will be conducted as Phases 2 and 3 are implemented. The level of design
review shall be consistent with zoning requirements.
The 2022 PD District is intended to continue Aldersly’s role as a community asset by renovating
the campus to be a valued residential community for older adults who want to live in central San
Rafael close to shops and other amenities, downtown activities and transit. The Master Plan
reflects the need of Aldersly to remain relevant to baby boomer older adults who are looking for a
senior residential community as they age into their 80s and older. In addition to the phases above,
Aldersly will make interior renovations as needed to Fredensborg (dining and resident amenities),
Kronborg (skilled nursing facility), Rosenborg (Assisted Living and Memory Care), and
Christriansborg (independent living) to maintain a high level of service. Appropriate building
permits will be secured at the time of interior improvements.
ATTACHMENT 2
EXHIBIT C
018538.0001 4884-7306-4767.1
Aldersly Property (326 and 308 Mission Ave.)
The land referred to is situated in the County of Marin, City of San Rafael, State of California,
and is described as follows:
PARCEL ONE:
BEGINNING at a point on the Northerly line of Mission Street, distant thereon 362.5 feet
Easterly from the Easterly line of Grand Avenue as said Street and Avenue are shown on the
Map of "Coleman's Addition to San Rafael," filed December 24, 1888 in Book 1 of Maps at Page
39, Marin County Records; said point also being the Southwest corner of that certain parcel of
land described in the Deed from Henry Schlosser, et ux, to J. D. Spreckles, Jr., recorded
September 5, 1907 in Book 110 of Deeds at Page 348, Marin County Records; thence leaving
said line of Mission Avenue and running along the Westerly line of said Deed to Spreckles,
North 25° 15' East 125.5 feet and North 30° 30' East 210.7 feet to the Southerly line of Belle
Avenue; running thence Southeasterly and Easterly, along said Southerly line of Belle Avenue,
to the Westerly corner of the Lot conveyed to Carlo Pedroli by deed recorded January 22, 1934
in Book 226 of Official Records at Page 146, Marin County Records; thence leaving said line of
Belle Avenue and running South 64° 13' East 53.95 feet to the Northwest corner of the Lot
conveyed to John M. Lucas and Murial C. Lucas, his wife by Deed recorded May 12, 1943 in
Book 443 of Official Records at Page 458, Marin County Records; thence along the Westerly
line of said Lot 50 conveyed to Lucas and along the Westerly line of the Lots conveyed to Ruth
M. Valiquette by Deed recorded June 14, 1943 in Book 449 of Official Records at Page 4, Marin
County Records; to Jennie Eggan and Karl Eggan, her husband, by Deed recorded January 24,
1945 in Book 481 of Official Records at Page 51, Marin County Records, to Evelyn Loper by
Deed recorded April 29, 1943 in Book 443 of Official Records at Page 373, Marin County
Records, South 24° 17' West 200 feet to the Northerly line of the Lot conveyed to Walter M.
Magraw and Lorraine S. Magraw, his wife, by Deed recorded August 4, 1943 in Book 449 of
Official Records at Page 155, Marin County Records; thence Westerly along said Northerly line
10 feet, more or less, to the Northwest corner of the lot so conveyed to Magraw; thence
Southerly along the Westerly line of said Lot, 84 feet, more or less, to the Northerly line of
Mission Street; thence Westerly along said Northerly line, 430.25 feet, more or less, to the point
of beginning.
PARCEL TWO:
THOSE CERTAIN EASEMENTS, 2 feet in width for utility purposes, as reserved in the
following Deeds from Frank Healion and Catherine Healion, his wife (A) To John M. Lucas
recorded May 12, 1943 in Book 443 of Official Records at Page 458, Marin County Records. (B)
To Jennie Eggan, et con, recorded January 24, 1945 in Book 481 Official Records at Page 51,
Marin County Records. (C) To Ruth M. Valiquette, recorded June 24, 1943 in Book 449 of
Official Records at Page 4, Marin County Records. (D) To Evelyn Loper, recorded April 29,
1943 in Book 443 of Official Records at Page 373, Marin County Records.
ATTACHMENT 2
EXHIBIT C
018538.0001 4884-7306-4767.1
PARCEL THREE:
COMMENCING at a point on the Northerly line of Mission Street, North 68° 05' West, 55.0 feet
from the point formed by the intersection of the Northerly line of Mission Street with the
Westerly line of Union Street, as the same is shown on the Map of Coleman's Addition to San
Rafael, filed in the Office of the County Recorder in Book One of Maps on Page 39, Marin
County Records; thence leaving Mission Street and running Northerly parallel to the Westerly
line of Union Street, a distance of 84.0 feet, more or less, to the Southwesterly line of the
property described in Deed of Trust from Frank Healion and Catherine Healion, his wife, to
Bank of San Rafael, a corporation, recorded December 9th, 1942 in Liber 440 of Official
Records at Page 115; thence along said line and its continuation North 64° 13' West 55 feet;
thence Southwesterly in a direct line to a point in the Northerly line of Mission Street, distant
thereon Westerly, 55 feet from the point of beginning; thence Easterly along said Northerly line
of Mission Street, 55 feet to the point of beginning. BEING A PORTION of Block 25 of the
abovementioned Subdivision.
APN: 014-054-31 and 014-054-32
ATTACHMENT 2
1
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT REZONING FROM PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (PD 1775) TO
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (PD) AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN INCLUDING 14 NET
NEW INDEPENDENT LIVING UNITS FOR THE 2.9-ACRE SENIOR RETIREMENT
COMMUNITY SITE LOCATED AT 308 AND 326 MISSION AVENUE
(ALDERSLY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY)
(APNS: APN 014-054-31 AND 014-054-32)
WHEREAS, on November 12, 2020, the applicant submitted applications for a Zone Change (ZC
20-001) to amend Planned Development District (PD 1775) to PD X; Master Use Permit (UP20-022); and
Environmental and Design Review (ED 20-051) for the phased construction of new buildings, and
demolition and alterations/additions to existing buildings, and including 14 net new Independent Living
units for the 2.9-acre senior retirement community site located at 308 And 326 Mission Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the proposed PD District land use and development standards for the property are
presented in Exhibit B, and the new PD proposes to:
a) Allow the Aldersly Retirement Community to evolve to meet the needs of current and future
residents;
b) Provide flexibility to meet future needs of its residents with facilities providing best design and
practices in services and environments, including a combination of improvements to campus
connectivity, renovations to current facilities, expansion of some buildings, and new construction;
c) Establish the permitted land uses for the new PD district; and
d) Establish development standards appropriate for the new District and Development Plan.
WHEREAS, on December 7, 2021, the project was considered by the Design Review Board
(DRB), and after considering the revisions made to the design of the Mission Avenue Independent Living
building and the bioretention areas and landscape screening, the Board recommended approval of the
project; and
WHEREAS, as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Cal.
Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.) an analysis and determination regarding a project’s
potential environmental impacts is required, and it was determined that the project has the potential to
result in potentially significant environmental effects, and the preparation of an Environmental Impact
Report (“EIR”) was recommended; and
WHEREAS, a Draft EIR was prepared and made available for a 45-day public review period
beginning on August 16, 2022 and ending on September 30, 2022; and
WHEREAS, the San Rafael Planning Commission held a public comment hearing on the Draft
EIR on September 13, 2022; and
WHEREAS, the San Rafael Planning Commission has recommended certification of the Final
EIR by adoption of a separate resolution; and
WHEREAS, consistent with the requirements of the CEQA Guidelines, a Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared to ensure implementation of, and compliance with,
all measures required to mitigate any environmental impact; and all of the identified mitigation measures
have also been included as conditions of the project approval; and
ATTACHMENT 2
2
WHEREAS, notice of the Planning Commission public hearing was provided through the following
means: 1) the subject site was posted; 2) publishing a legal ad in the Marin Independent Journal, a local
newspaper of general circulation in the area, on October 29, 2022; and 3) notices were mailed to
surrounding property owners within 300 feet, pertinent agencies (including responsible and trustee
agencies), organizations and special interest groups in conformance with the CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, on November 15, 2022, following a public hearing and deliberation on the project,
the Planning Commission voted 4-0-3-0 and adopted Planning Commission Resolutions 22-16, 22-17
and 22-18 recommending that the City Council 1) Certify the Final EIR and adopt a Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program for the project; 2) adopt an Ordinance approving a zoning amendment from
Planned Development District (PD1775) to a revised Planned Development District (PD) ZC 20-001; and
3) conditionally approve the Master Use Permit (UP20-022) and Environmental and Design Review
Permit 20-051; and
WHEREAS, on December 5, 2022, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the
proposed project, accepting and considering all oral and written public testimony and the written report
of the Department of Community Development; and
WHEREAS, on December 5, 2022, by adoption of separate resolution, the City Council certified
the Final EIR and adopted an MMRP for the project; and
WHEREAS, the custodian of documents which constitute the record of proceedings upon which
this decision is based is the Community Development Department; and
WHEREAS, as required by San Rafael Municipal Code Sections 14.07.090 and 14.27.060, the
City Council makes the following findings in support of an ordinance to rezone the property from Planned
Development District PD 1775 to a new Planned Development District (PD), as shown on the map
contained in Exhibit A and further described in Exhibit C, and to establish new PD Development
Standards as outlined in Exhibit B:
1. The Development Plan is consistent in principle with the San Rafael General Plan 2040 and
other applicable City plans or policies in that the project includes appropriate development
standards, and is subject to an Environmental and Design Review Permit implementing the
intent of Chapter 14.25 (Environmental and Design Review Permit) of the San Rafael Zoning
Ordinance (Title 14 of the San Rafael Municipal Code), Subdivision Ordinance (Title 15 of
San Rafael Municipal Code), and the applicable General Plan land use policies, as described
in the General Plan Consistency Analysis included as Exhibit 5 of the November 15, 2022
Planning Commission staff report.
2. The applicant proposes to add 14 net new Independent Living units, which will help serve to
accommodate the projected need for 3,220 additional housing units in the City by the year
2031. The proposed new buildings create a reasonable transition between the existing
residential properties in the neighborhood and the multi-family and commercial properties to
the south. Further, the development plan has been reviewed and recommended for approval
by the Design Review Board.
3. The local utility agencies have reviewed the plans and confirmed that the proposed
development can be served by public facilities such as sewer, water, refuse services and
other infrastructure resources that currently serve the existing development adjacent to the
site.
4. The applicant has developed property development standards for the new PD zoning, that
ATTACHMENT 2
3
are consistent with the proposed property development standards of the underlying base
district. The proposed new development has been designed to comply with the applicable
PD development standards, and the proposed project is not requesting any deviations
(Variances) from land use regulations.
5. The auto, bicycle and pedestrian traffic systems presented on the Development Plan are
adequately designed for circulation needs and public safety in that: a) the Development Plan
proposes sidewalks throughout the development for pedestrian access; b) emergency
vehicle ingress and egress from the development would be provided from adjacent public
streets (Mission and Belle Avenue); and c) the access and site layout have been reviewed
by the appropriate City departments and have been found to be adequate by the City of San
Rafael Fire and Police Departments.
6. The public health, safety and welfare are served by the adoption of the proposed PD District,
in that the project as proposed and conditioned: a) would implement housing and
environmental goals and policies adopted for this site in the San Rafael General Plan 2040;
b) would conform to City standards for safety; c) as proposed, and conditioned, it would be
consistent with the recommended mitigation measures presented in the Final EIR and the
MMRP prepared for this project.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL DOES
HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
DIVISION 1.
The Zoning Map of the City of San Rafael, California, adopted by reference by Section 14.01.020 of the
San Rafael Municipal Code is amended by reclassifying the following real property from Planned
Development District PD 1775 to a new Planned Development District (PD) -- Ordinance No. XXXX.
Said property so reclassified is located at 308 and 326 Mission Avenue, San Rafael, and further
identified as County Assessor’s Parcel No’s: APN 014-054-31 and 014-054-32, as shown on the map
attached as Exhibit “A” and described in Exhibit “C”, which are incorporated by reference.
DIVISION 2.
Any development of this property shall be subject to the conditions outlined in Exhibit “B”, PD Zoning
and Planned Development Standards for Aldersly, which is attached hereto and made a part hereof,
and consistent with all submitted materials that constitute the Development Plan, as required by Section
14.07.060 of the San Rafael Municipal Code.
DIVISION 3.
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be
invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The Council
hereby declares that it would have adopted the Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence,
clause, or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsection, sentence,
clause, or phrase be declared invalid.
DIVISION 4.
A summary of this ordinance shall be published and a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance
shall be posted in the office of the City Clerk at least five (5) days prior to the Council meeting at which
it is adopted.
ATTACHMENT 2
4
This ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage, and the summary
of this ordinance shall be published within fifteen (15) days after the adoption, together with the names
of those Councilmembers voting for or against same, in the Marin Independent Journal, a newspaper
of general circulation published and circulated in the City of San Rafael, County of Marin, State of
California.
Within fifteen (15) days after adoption, the City Clerk shall also post in the office of the City Clerk, a
certified copy of the full text of this ordinance along with the names of those Councilmembers voting for
or against the ordinance.
_________________
KATE COLIN, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________
LINDSAY LARA, City Clerk
THE FOREGOING ORDINANCE was first read and introduced at a regular meeting of the San Rafael
City Council on the 5th day of December 2022, and was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the
San Rafael City Council on the 19th day of December 2022 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
______________________
LINDSAY LARA, City Clerk
Exhibit A: Zone Change Map
Exhibit B: Planned Development District Standards
Exhibit C: Legal Property Description
ATTACHMENT 3
RESOLUTION NO. 15167
RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE MASTER USE
PERMIT AMENDMENT (UP20-022) AND ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN REVIEW
PERMIT (ED20-051) FOR THE ALDERSLY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY AT 308 AND 326
MISSION AVENUE (APN 014-054-31 and 32)
WHEREAS, on November 12, 2020, Peter Schakow, President of the Aldersly Board of
Directors (applicant), submitted applications to the City of San Rafael requesting approval of a
Zoning Amendment to revise the Planned Development for the Aldersly Retirement Community
that would allow for the phased improvements on the campus that include demolition and
renovation of existing buildings, and construction of new buildings; and
WHEREAS, the applications included concurrent requests for a Planned Development
(PD) District Rezoning (ZC20-001), Master Use Permit (UP20-022) and Environmental and
Design Review Permit (ED20-051); and said project applications were deemed complete on
March 19, 2021; and
WHEREAS, on December 7, 2021, the City of San Rafael Design Review Board held a
duly-noticed public hearing on the Environmental and Design Review Permit, accepting all oral
and written public testimony and the written report of the Community Development Department
staff and recommended approval of the Environmental and Design Review Permit; and
WHEREAS, on November 15, 2022, the City of San Rafael Planning Commission held
a duly-noticed public hearing on the proposed Master Use Permit and Environmental and
Design Review Permit, accepting all oral and written public testimony and the written report of
the Community Development Department staff and recommended approval of the Master Use
Permit and Environmental and Design Review Permit; and
WHEREAS, on December 5, 2022, the City Council of the City of San Rafael held a
duly-noticed public hearing on the proposed Master Use Permit and Environmental and Design
Review Permit, accepting all oral and written public testimony and the written report of the
Community Development Department staff; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Rafael has certified an Environmental
Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed project consistent with the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act; and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of San Rafael
hereby conditionally approves Master Use Permit UP20-022 and Environmental and Design
Review Permit ED20-051 based on the following findings required by San Rafael Municipal
Code (SRMC) Title 14-Zoning:
Findings for Master Use Permit
(UP20-022)
1. The proposed use is in accord with the general plan, the objectives of the zoning
ordinance, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located:
The proposed use is consistent with General Plan 2040, adopted Montecito/Happy Valley
Neighborhood Plan and other applicable City plans and policies in that:
ATTACHMENT 3
2
a) The proposed use is consistent with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance, and the
purposes of the PD District in which the site is located in that the General Plan High
Density Residential land use designation and the Planned Development zoning district
regulations permit the proposed expansion of the Aldersly campus.
b) The proposed use is a continuation of the existing use as a non-profit retirement
community that supports the City’s goal of serving older adults and enhancing their
quality of life as called for in General Plan Goal EDI-6: An Age-Friendly Community.
The new and expanded independent living units and other improvements would attract
new residents and enhance the living experience of existing residents. The second
dining venue, lounge and gathering spaces, and core active space would provide
additional areas for residents to meet and socialize. The outdoor garden for the Memory
Care Center and other outdoor experiences would elevate the campus’ outdoor living
experience. The site accessibility improvements would make it easier for residents to
move about the campus.
c) The project would implement Housing Policy H-13: Senior Housing providing housing
options that meet the needs of San Rafael’s older population. The Project would
increase the City’s supply of independent living units in a residential facility that provides
additional services for older adults. Independent living units provide older adults the
option to live in a supported community with the experience of living on their own. The
14 net new independent living units are also an option for older adults seeking to
downsize from their single-family homes, and would contribute toward meeting the City’s
regional housing needs allocation (RHNA) by adding to the City’s housing inventory.
d) The Project would implement General Plan Policy EV-3.3: Economically Productive
Use of Land by making the most of the development potential of the Aldersly campus.
The project would provide modernized and larger independent living units and other
improvements within the footprint of the existing campus that would ensure that Aldersly
can remain competitive and operate sustainably as a non-profit into the future and
continue to provide a home for older adults and retain its employees.
e) Policy LU-1.3: Land Use and Climate Change. The project site is located north and
east of the Downtown San Rafael, 0.4 miles from the SMART Downtown San Rafael
Station in an area where alternatives to driving are most viable and shorter trip lengths
are possible.
f) Policy M-3.8: Land Use and VMT: Encourage higher-density employment and
residential uses near major transit hubs such as Downtown San Rafael, recognizing the
potential for VMT reduction in areas where there are attractive alternatives to driving,
concentrations of complementary activities, and opportunities for shorter trips between
different uses. The Project would increase the overall density of the Aldersly campus
with 35 modernized and larger independent living units and other amenities such as the
second dining venue and lounge/gathering spaces. The Project is within one half mile
of the San Rafael Transit Center which is served by SMART, Marin Transit, Golden Gate
Transit, and Sonoma County Transit, and is near commercial and retail uses in
Montecito Plaza downtown San Rafael.
g) Policy M-7.6: Off-Street Parking Standards. Maintain off-street parking standards
that adequately respond to demand, minimize adverse effects on neighborhoods, avoid
future parking problems, and sustain local businesses.
Per recent State legislation (AB 2097), minimum parking requirements cannot be
imposed or enforced in any residential, commercial, or other development project
located within ½ mile of public transit after January 1, 2023. Since construction will not
commence until after that date, Policy M-7.6 is not applicable to this project.
Nevertheless, the project would voluntarily provide up to eight (8) additional on-site
parking spaces over what exists today. In addition, a condition of the Use Permit would
ATTACHMENT 3
3
require that Aldersly implement a Parking Management Strategy to maximize on-site
parking during peak periods and reduce the use of on-street parking in the
neighborhood.
2. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be
detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to
properties or improvements in the vicinity, or to the general welfare of the city:
The proposed use, as conditioned, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or
welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity, or to the general
welfare of the City. The proposed use and the overall project has been reviewed by all
appropriate City Departments and permitting agencies and has been conditioned
accordingly to avoid such detriment. Furthermore, mitigation measures identified in the
Final EIR and included in MMRP include measures to protect the public health, safety, and
welfare.
3. The proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the zoning
ordinance:
The proposed mix of residential dwelling units and communal facilities comply with the
applicable provisions of the Planned Development (PD) District contained in the Zoning
Ordinance and all other applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, as discussed in
Use Permit Finding 1 above, as well as discussed in the PD District and Environmental and
Design Review Permit findings made for the project.
Findings for Environmental and Design Review Permit
(ED20-051)
1. The project design is in accord with the general plan, the objectives of the zoning
ordinance and the purposes of this chapter:
The phased development, as conditioned, is in accord with the General Plan, the
Neighborhood Plan, objectives of the Zoning Ordinance in that the Design Review Board
has reviewed the project for compliance with the General Plan Policies and
Montecito/Happy Valley Neighborhood Plan Policies as further described in Master Use
Permit Findings above, and the Landscape, Parking, Building and Site Design Criteria in
the Zoning Ordinance, and has recommended that the project meet the established criteria
by providing a high quality design and materials that are appropriate for the site and
neighborhood.
2. The project design is consistent with all applicable site, architecture and
landscaping design criteria and guidelines for the district in which the site is
located:
The project is consistent with applicable regulations contained in the City of San
Rafael Zoning Ordinance, including site, architecture and landscaping design criteria
established in the PD development standards which is in compliance with General Plan
2040 and the Planned Development zoning regulations The project sufficiently screens
buildings and parking areas with landscaping.
3. The project design minimizes adverse environmental impacts:
The project is consistent with the following policies in General Plan 2040, which aim at
reducing impacts on the environment:
ATTACHMENT 3
4
Policy CDP-5.13: Protection of Archaeological Resources
Policy CDP-5.14: Tribal Cultural Resources
Policy C-1.13: Special Status Species
Policy C-2.4: Particulate Matter Pollution Reduction
Policy C-3.2: Reduce Pollution from Urban Runoff
Policy C-3.3: Low Impact Development
Policy C-3.9: Water-Efficient Landscaping
Policy C-5.2: Consider Climate Change Impacts
Policy N-1.2: Maintaining Acceptable Noise
Policy N-1.9: Maintaining Peace and Quiet
Policy M-3.2: Using VMT in Environmental Review
4. The project design would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare,
nor materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity:
The project has been reviewed by all appropriate City Departments and permitting
agencies and conditioned accordingly, and the potential environmental impacts of the
project were assessed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, a Final
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the project and mitigation measures
included in the MMRP would further protect health and safety.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of San Rafael approves the
Master Use Permit and Environmental and Design Review Permit subject to the following conditions:
MASTER USE PERMIT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
(UP20-022)
Planning Division Conditions of Approval
1. Approved Use. This Use Permit authorizes development of the 2.9-acre Aldersly campus at 326
Mission Avenue in accordance with the Planned Development (PD) District approval (ZC20-001),
which lists the permitted uses including +14 net new Independent Living units, Assisted Living
and Skilled Nursing uses. The Community Development Director may review and approve
amendments to the Master Use Permit, which are within the limits of the approved PD District
(ZC20-001) and the PD zoning regulations.
2. Permit Validity. This Permit shall become effective on December 13, 2022 and shall be valid for
a period of two (2) years from the date of final approval, or December 13, 2024, and shall become
null and void if a building permit is not issued or a time extension granted by December 13, 2024.
A permit for the construction of a building or structure is deemed exercised when a valid City
building permit, if required, is issued, and construction has lawfully commenced. A permit for the
use of a building or a property is exercised when, if required, a valid City business license has
been issued, and the permitted use has commenced on the property.
3. Subject to All Applicable Laws and Regulations. The approved use and/or construction is subject
to, and shall comply with, all applicable City Ordinances and laws and regulations of other
governmental agencies. Prior to construction, the applicant shall identify and secure all applicable
permits from the Building Division, Public Works Department and other affected City divisions and
departments.
4. Revocation. The City reserves the right to bring this permit up for revocation per SRMC 14.21.150
and as provided in Chapter 14.30 of the San Rafael Zoning Ordinance for any use that is found
to be in violation of any of these conditions of approval.
ATTACHMENT 3
5
5. Building Permit Required. The applicant shall obtain a building permit prior to any building
improvements to meet the requirements per the California Building Code (CBC). Conditions Shall
be Printed on Plans. The conditions of this Permit shall be printed on the second sheet of each
plan set submitted for a building permit pursuant to this Use Permit, under the title ‘Use Permit
Conditions.’ Additional sheets may also be used if the second sheet is not of sufficient size to list
all of the conditions. The sheet(s) containing the conditions shall be of the same size as those
sheets containing the construction drawings; 8-1/2” by 11” sheets are not acceptable.
6. Development of the site (i.e., the building design and location, scale, architecture, landscaping
and similar improvements) shall be completed in accordance with a valid (i.e. not expired)
Environmental and Design Review Permit approval.
7. The Master Use Permit shall be subject to the Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED20-
051) conditions of approval. Truck delivery schedules to the Aldersly campus shall be coordinated
with drop-off and pick-up times at child daycare and schools in the neighborhood to reduce the
potential for conflicts on Belle Avenue.
8. Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit for any new building on the Aldersly campus, a
Parking Management Strategy shall be submitted for review and approval by the Director of Public
Works and the Director of Community Development. The Parking Management Strategy shall
identify strategies and methods to increase on-site parking capacity and reduce the overall
demand for parking, particularly during peak parking demand at 2:30 pm on weekdays during the
staff shift change. The Parking Management Strategy may include, but is not limited to, the
following strategies:
a) Support transit use by employees and visitors: Aldersly employees currently have the
option of purchasing transit passes before taxes are taken out of their wages, which provides
a savings for users. The site is served by a number of transit options as it is less than one-
half mile from the San Rafael SMART station and Transit Center. While for most people this
is a walkable distance, Aldersly could further encourage transit use by providing van service
as needed to transport people to and from these connections. To make transit use a viable
option for employees, this may require providing some flexibility in shift times to allow them to
make convenient connections.
b) Provide public transportation information: As some staff and residents may be unaware
of the available public transportation options, providing information about train and bus
schedules, accommodations for bicycles on transit vehicles, and the availability of the Marin
Emergency Ride Home (ERH) program would support increased transit use. The ERH
program, operated by the Transportation Authority of Marin, reimburses rides home in case
of an emergency for workers in Marin County who use an alternative transportation option,
such as carpooling, vanpooling, public transit, bicycling, or walking. For many people, the
availability of this program can make non-vehicle transportation a viable option as it addresses
unforeseen circumstances when vehicle transportation may be necessary.
c) Offer Car Sharing and Driver Services: The average age of residents in the independent
living units is 88 years old and those with cars tend to drive infrequently. By offering car
sharing or driver services for errands, appointments, or other trips, these residents may be
more inclined to not bring a vehicle and/or relinquish their vehicles and parking spaces.
d) Prepare a Valet Parking Plan: Aldersly currently provides valet parking during events. The
purpose of the Valet Parking Plan would be to increase on-site parking by up to 13 spaces,
as needed during non-event scenarios. The Valet Parking Plan would be approved by the
Director of Public Works and the Director of Community Development.
e) Install lift system: A parking lift system would enable vehicles to be stacked vertically and
expand the on-site parking supply. Given the minimal use of vehicles by most residents, the
Aldersly could maneuver vehicles as needed.
The Parking Management Strategy shall be implemented prior to occupancy of the Mission
Avenue Independent Living building.
ATTACHMENT 3
6
9. All biohazardous waste generated on the Aldersly campus, including but not limited to used
bandages/dressings, out-of-date prescription medication and sharps/needles shall be stored in
appropriate containers until they are picked up and shall be disposed of by a service that is
licensed to handle such materials.
10. The applicant or permittee shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City or its agents,
officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City or its agents,
officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the Planning Commission,
City Council, Community Development Director, or any other department, committee, or agency
of the City concerning a development, variance, permit or land use approval which action is
brought within the time period provided for in any applicable statute; provided, however, that the
applicant’s or permittee’s duty to so defend, indemnify, and hold harmless shall be subject to the
City’s promptly notifying the applicant or permittee of any said claim, action, or proceeding and
the City’s full cooperation in the applicant’s or permittee’s defense of said claims, actions, or
proceedings.
ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
(ED20-051)
Police Department
1. The street numbers shall be displayed in a prominent location on the street side of the property
in such a position that the number is easily visible to approaching emergency vehicles. The
numbers shall be no less than four inches (4”) in height and shall be of contrasting color to the
background to which they are attached. The address numbers shall be illuminated during
darkness.
2. The address shall be in a sequence with the numerical order of the rest of the street/building.
3. Exposed roof vents and ducts shall be grated or constructed of an impact resistant material to the
satisfaction of the police department. Skylights shall be secured and hatch openings shall be
burglary resistant. Glazing shall be of a burglary resistant glass or glass-like material.
4. All exterior lighting shall be sufficient to establish a sense of well-being to the pedestrian and one
that is sufficient to facilitate recognition of persons at a reasonable distance. Type and placement
of lighting shall be to the satisfaction of the Police Department.
5. All exterior doors shall be of solid core construction with a minimum thickness of one and three
fourths inches (1-3/4") or with panels not less than nine sixteenth inches (9/16") thick. Side garage
doors and doors leading from these garage areas to private residences or multiple dwelling
residences are included in this requirement.
6. Metal-framed glass doors shall be set in metal door jambs.
7. Glass sliding doors shall have a secondary type locking device to the satisfaction of the police
department. The secondary lock shall be a dead bolt and shall be no less than 1/8 inch in
thickness and shall have a minimum hardened steel throw of 1/2 inch.
8. Exterior man doors and doors leading from the garage areas into the private residences or
multiple dwelling residences, shall have a dead bolt locking device with a minimum throw of 1/2
inch. A secondary lock is required and shall be a dead bolt lock with a cylinder guard and a
hardened steel throw that is a minimum of 1 inch long. Both locking mechanisms shall be keyed
the same.
9. Metal framed glass doors shall have a dead bolt lock with a cylinder guard and a hardened steel
throw that is a minimum of one inch long.
10. Exterior jambs for doors shall be so constructed or protected so as to prevent violation of the
ATTACHMENT 3
7
function of the strike plate from the outside. The strike plate shall be secured to the jamb by a
minimum of two screws which must penetrate at least two inches into the solid backing beyond
the jamb.
11. Front doors shall have a front door viewer that provides a minimum of 180 degrees peripheral
vision.
12. Exterior doors that swing outward shall have non-removal hinge pins.
13. In-swinging exterior doors shall have rabbeted jambs.
14. Glass on exterior doors or within 40 inches of an exterior door shall be break resistant glass or
glass-like material to the satisfaction of the Police Department.
15. All windows within 12 feet of the ground level shall have a secondary lock mounted to the frame
of the window. The secondary lock shall be a bolt lock and shall be no less than 1/8 inch in
thickness. The lock shall have a hardened steel throw of 1/2 inch minimum length.
16. Any window within 40 inches of an exterior door shall be stationary and non-removable.
17. Landscaping shall not block or obstruct the view of any door, window, or lighting fixture.
18. Any alternate materials or methods of construction shall be reviewed with the Crime Prevention
Officer before installation.
19. The new construction shall be pre-wired for the installation of an intrusion alarm system.
Fire Department
20. Addresses shall be posted conforming to Fire Prevention Standard 205.
21. Based on Uniform Building Code or Fire Code requirements, an automatic fire sprinkler system
shall be installed throughout conforming to NFPA Std.13D.
22. A permit application shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau with two sets of plans for
review prior to the installation of all automatic and fixed fire extinguishing and detection systems.
Specification sheets for each type of device shall also be submitted for review.
23. Due to the wildland fire interface area, fire retardant roof covering is required with a minimum
Class "A" listing.
24. Spark arrestors shall be installed conforming to the UBC.
25. A minimum 30-foot wide break (brush cleaning) shall be maintained around the structure.
26. UL/SFM smoke detectors and openable bedroom windows shall be installed conforming to the
Uniform Building Code.
27. An engineered site plan showing all existing and proposed site conditions shall be submitted with
the application for a building permit.
Community Development Department, Building Division
28. A level “B” soils report shall be submitted with the application for a building permit.
29. The project soils engineer shall review and approve the plans submitted for a building permit for
compliance with the recommendations of the project soils report.
30. A construction soils certification letter shall be submitted by the project soils engineer prior to
approval of the building final inspection
31. An erosion control plan using “best management practices” shall be submitted with the application
for a building permit. The plan shall show methods of controlling erosion during and after
construction.
32. Drainage shall not be concentrated and diverted onto adjacent properties. Drainage from
developed areas shall be dispersed across the project site.
ATTACHMENT 3
8
33. The improvement plans shall show all existing and proposed sanitary sewer facilities.
34. A sewer main extension may be required and if required shall be completed prior to occupancy
of the residence. An engineered plan for the sewer main extension shall be submitted with the
application for a building permit. The sewer main extension shall meet all the requirements and
standards of the San Rafael Sanitation District. The plans shall be reviewed and approved by the
San Rafael Sanitation District.
35. All sewer related work shall be performed in accordance with the San Rafael Sanitation District
(SRSD) Standards. If a new/separate sewer lateral is proposed, Civil/Utility Plans prepared by a
registered civil engineer will be required prior issuance of the building permit.
36. If the existing sewer lateral(s) will be used for new/renovated facilities, the existing laterals shall
be televised and inspected, and a copy of the video submitted to SRSD with the building permit
application.
37. Prior to SRSD plan approval, sewer connection fees shall be imposed for all additional drainage
fixtures and living units.
38. An encroachment permit shall be required for any work in the public right-of-way.
39. The improvement plans shall show all existing and proposed utilities.
40. Prior to issuance of a building permit a letter shall be submitted from the Marin Municipal Water
District stating that adequate water pressure is available to serve this residence.
41. Prior to issuance of a building permit a copy of the access easement across the adjacent property
shall be submitted.
42. The existing driveway shall be surfaced with a 2-inch overlay of asphalt concrete throughout the
project frontage.
Community Development Department, Planning Division
43. This Environmental and Design Review Permit approves Phases 1, 2 and 3 of the Aldersly
Development Plan, including the demolition of existing buildings and the construction of new
buildings and landscaping, parking lot, and other improvements on the 2.9-acre Aldersly campus
at 326 Mission Avenue in accordance with the Planned Development (PD) District approval ZC20-
001) and Use Permit approval UP20-022, and subject to Mitigation Measures contained in the
Final EIR and MMRP adopted for the project.
44. Plans and Representations Become Conditions. All information and representations, whether oral
or written, including the building techniques, materials, elevations and appearance of the project,
as presented for approval on plans, dated May 16, 2022 and on file with the Community
Development Department, Planning Division, shall be the same as required for the issuance of a
building permit, except as modified by these conditions of approval.
45. Minor Modifications. Substantially consistent and minor modifications to building exteriors and
locations, fence styles and locations, signage, and significant landscape features may be
approved in writing by the Community Development Director or designee, based on the
determination that the proposed modification is consistent with other building and design elements
of the approved architectural control permit and will not have an adverse impact on the character
and aesthetics of the site. The Director may refer any request for revisions to the plans to the
Planning Commission. Further environmental review and analysis may be required if such
changes necessitate further review and analysis pursuant to the California Environmental Quality
Act.
46. Permit Validity. This Permit shall become effective on December 13, 2022 and shall be valid for
a period of two (2) years from the date of final approval, or December 13, 2024, and shall become
null and void if a building permit is not issued or a time extension granted by December 13, 2024.
A permit for the construction of a building or structure is deemed exercised when a valid City
ATTACHMENT 3
9
building permit, if required, is issued, and construction has lawfully commenced. A permit for the
use of a building or a property is exercised when, if required, a valid City business license has
been issued, and the permitted use has commenced on the property.
47. Subject to All Applicable Laws and Regulations. The approved use and/or construction is subject
to, and shall comply with, all applicable City Ordinances and laws and regulations of other
governmental agencies. Prior to construction, the applicant shall identify and secure all applicable
permits from the Building Division, Public Works Department and other affected City divisions and
departments.
48. Building Permit Required. The applicant shall obtain a building permit prior to any tenant
improvement to meet the requirements per the California Building Code (CBC).
49. All mechanical equipment (i.e., air conditioning units, meters and transformers) and
appurtenances not entirely enclosed within the structure (on side of building or roof) shall be
screened from public view. The method used to accomplish the screening shall be indicated on
the building plans and approved by the Planning Division prior to issuance of a building permit.
50. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant is to comply with conditions of the Marin
Municipal Water District for the landscaping improvements and other water conservation
measures as outlined in letter regarding Water Availability, dated December 10, 2020.
51. Conditions Shall be Printed on Plans. The conditions of this Permit shall be printed on the second
sheet of each plan set submitted for a building permit pursuant to this Use Permit, under the title
‘Use Permit Conditions. Additional sheets may also be used if the second sheet is not of sufficient
size to list all of the conditions. The sheet(s) containing the conditions shall be of the same size
as those sheets containing the construction drawings; 8-1/2” by 11” sheets are not acceptable.
52. Construction Hours: Consistent with the City of San Rafael Municipal Code Section 8.13.050.A,
construction hours shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 9:00 a.m
to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Construction shall not be permitted on Sundays or City-observed
holidays. Construction activities shall include delivery of materials, hauling materials off-site;
startup of construction equipment engines, arrival of construction workers, paying of radios and
other noises caused by equipment and/or construction workers arriving at, or working on, the site.
53. Landscaping. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall receive approval from the
Marin Municipal Water District for proposed landscaping. Landscaping and irrigation must meet
the Marin Municipal Water District's (MMWD) water conservation rules and regulations. All
existing landscaping damaged during construction shall be replaced. All landscaping shall be
maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, free of weeds and debris. Any dying or dead
landscaping shall be replaced in a timely fashion. No part of the existing landscaping shall be
removed, unless their removal has been reviewed and approved by the Planning Division
54. Exterior Lighting. All exterior lighting shall be energy efficient where feasible; and shielded and
directed downward and away from property lines to prevent excessive glare beyond the subject
property. The project shall be subject to a 90-day post installation lighting inspection to evaluate
the need for adjustment and assure compliance with SRMC Section 14.16.227.
55. Fees. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits, the applicant shall pay all outstanding Planning
Division application processing fees, including a $10,000 fee deposit for mitigation monitoring.
56. Except as conditioned herein, building techniques, materials, elevations, landscaping and
appearance of this project, as presented for approval, shall be the same as required for the
issuance of a building permit. Any future additions, expansions, remodeling, etc. shall be subject
to the review and approval of the Planning Division.
57. This Environmental and Design Review Permit shall be subject to the adopted PD zoning
regulations (ZC20-001).
58. City review and approval of a Sign Permit shall be required for any new entry signage, consistent
with the Sign Ordinance regulations.
ATTACHMENT 3
10
59. All mechanical equipment (i.e., air conditioning units, meters and transformers) and
appurtenances not entirely enclosed within the structure (on side of building or root) shall be
screened from public view as indicated on project plans.
60. Any materials containing asbestos, lead-based paints or other potentially hazardous building
materials shall be removed in compliance with all applicable federal, state and local regulations
and the requirements of any agency having jurisdiction. Before removal of any materials
suspected to contain asbestos, the BAAQMD's Enforcement Division shall be notified to
determine proper handling procedures and permit requirements.
61. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit an application for a Lot Line
Adjustment (LLA) to merge the two lots that comprise the Aldersly Planned Development District
area. Written evidence that the LLA or other instrument has been recorded with the Marin County
Clerk shall be submitted to the San Rafael Community Development Department prior to issuance
of a building permit for Mission Avenue Independent Living building.
62. Plans submitted for a building permit shall include details regarding the location, distribution and
planting of on-site bioretention areas, consistent with revised Sheets C2.0-R and L6.1-R of plans
submitted for Design Review dated November 10, 2021.
63. Prior to issuance of building permit the applicant shall pay an in-lieu Affordable Housing Fee in
accordance with SRMC Section 14.16.030. The applicant shall be responsible for complying with
the affordable housing requirement which establishes that 10% of the 14 new units shall be
available to low income residents or payment of in lieu fee as established by City Council
resolution (Resolution 11942 as amended) equal to the number of required low income units (1.4
units) multiplied by the in-lieu fee in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
64. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a design level noise study for
review and approval by the Community Development Department. The noise study shall identify
the required noise control measures (window and door sound ratings) that will reduce interior
noise levels to the City and State requirement of Ldn 40 in bedrooms and Ldn 45 in other rooms.
The study shall also identify locations where windows must remain in the closed position to meet
the required interior sound level. If the Mechanical Engineer determines that these rooms require
outdoor air, then natural ventilation via open windows should not be relied upon and an alternate
means of supplying outdoor air should be provided (e.g. mechanical ventilation). The alternate
means for supplying outdoor air must be reviewed by the Acoustical Consultant to confirm that it
does not compromise the noise reduction provided by the exterior window and wall assembly.
65. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the final landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted
to the Planning Division for review and approval.
66. All landscaping shall be installed prior to the occupancy of the new buildings during each phase
of development. The City may agree to accept a bond for a portion of landscaping improvements
not completed. In the event that a bond is posted for a portion of the site landscaping, it shall
cover the amount estimated for completing the landscaping. All areas proposed for landscaping
must be covered with bark or a substitute material approved by the Community Development
Department prior to occupancy.
67. All landscaping shall be maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, free of weeds and debris.
Prior to final occupancy, the applicants shall submit a two-year maintenance contract for
landscaping or post a two-year maintenance bond.
68. The landscaping plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Marin Municipal Water District prior
to issuance of building permits.
Department of Public Works Conditions
69. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall pay a traffic mitigation fee for 1 net new
AM trip and 2 net new PM trips for a total of 3 peak-hour trips at the current fee of $4,246/trip for
ATTACHMENT 3
11
the amount of $12,738.
70. All improvements on Mission Avenue, including storm drain, grading and utilities to support all 3
phases of work shall be completed as part of Phase 1.
71. All backflow preventers, fire department connections (FDC), and other above ground utility
structures shall be placed on private property.
72. A hydrology study shall be submitted prior to issuance of a building permit. The study shall
include hydraulic calculations for the 10-year storm frequency for pre- and post-construction
conditions to verify no increase in runoff due to the proposed development. Engineering solutions
to mitigate any increase in runoff shall be provided.
73. The following frontage improvements along Mission Avenue shall be required:
a. Pavement restoration per a paving plan reviewed and approved by the DPW prior to issuance
of building permit. All pavement restoration shall consist of minimum 2-inch-thick asphalt
grind and overlay.
Please note, paving shall be kept in good repair at all times during site improvements and
construction to the satisfaction of the DPW. Interim repaving during construction may be
requested by the DPW.
b. Replace the sidewalk along the property frontage on Mission Ave. extending to Union Street.
c. Construct a new ADA compliant curb ramp at the northwest corner of the Mission Ave. and
Union St. intersection, including a new concrete curb return and truncated dome warning
stripes. This is the terminus of the new sidewalk requested above. Upgrade/modify the three
remaining curb ramps at the Mission Ave. and Union St. intersection to be ADA compliant.
d. The four (4) crosswalks at the Mission Ave. and Union St. intersection shall be restriped.
e. The existing curb ramp on Mission Ave. frontage, across from Mary St., shall be
replaced/upgraded to be ADA compliant.
74. A construction management plan shall be provided for review and approval by the City prior to
issuance of building permit or grading permit. The plan shall be consistent with the Preliminary
Construction Staging & Management Plan, dated 3/22/22, and include the following:
a. All materials and equipment shall be staged on-site, unless otherwise approved.
b. Traffic control plan to address on-site and off-site construction traffic.
c. Proposed construction phasing and approximate timeline.
d. All public streets and sidewalks that are impacted by the grading and construction operation
for the project shall be kept clean and free of debris at all times.
75. This project includes more than 5,000 square feet of total impervious area replacement and
creation and therefore is considered a regulated project. The project also proposes to use non-
LID facilities and will need to show equivalent effectiveness to bioretention areas in accordance
with Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association (BASMAA) requirements. The
following documents are required to be provided in accordance with Marin County Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Program (MCSTOPPP) and the BASMAA requirements:
a. Stormwater Control Plan.
i.A written document to accompany the plan set used primarily for municipal review to verify
compliance with stormwater treatment requirements. (Needed to obtain a grading or building
permit.)
b. Stormwater Facilities Operations and Maintenance (O&M) plan.
i.A written document and exhibit outlining facilities on-site and maintenance activities and
responsibilities for property owners. (Provide prior to occupancy)
c. Operations and Maintenance Agreement.
ATTACHMENT 3
12
i.A formal agreement between the property owner and the city that shall be recorded with the
property deed. (Provide prior to occupancy)
76. A grading permit shall be required from Department of Public Works (DPW) prior to start of
construction and shall include phase-specific grading, drainage, and erosion control plans.
77. Prior to commencing work within the public right-of-way (ROW), the applicant shall obtain an
encroachment permit from DPW.
78. A construction vehicle impact fee shall be required at the time of building permit issuance, which
is calculated at 1% of the valuation, with the first $10,000 of valuation exempt.
MITIGATION MEASURES FROM CERTIFIED FINAL EIR
AND ADOPTED MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP)
79. (Mitigation Measure AQ-1): Best Management Practices. During any construction period ground
disturbance, the applicant shall ensure that the project contractor implement measures to control
dust and exhaust. Implementation of the measures recommended by BAAQMD and listed below
would reduce the air quality impacts associated with grading and new construction to a less-
than-significant level. Additional measures are identified to reduce construction equipment
exhaust emissions. The contractor shall implement the following BMPs:
1. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and
unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day
2. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered.
3. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet
power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is
prohibited.
4. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour (mph).
5. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as
possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or
soil binders are used.
6. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or
reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne
toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]).
Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points.
7. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with
manufacturer's specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic
and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation.
8. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the Lead
Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action
within 48 hours. The Air District' s phone number shall also be visible to ensure
compliance with applicable regulations.
80. (Mitigation Measure AQ-2) Selection of equipment during construction to minimize emissions.
The project sponsor shall achieve a fleet-wide average reduction in DPM exhaust emissions from
the onsite, off-road construction equipment by 65-percent or greater in order to stay below
BAAQMD thresholds. One feasible way to achieve this reduction would include the following:
1. All diesel-powered off-road equipment, larger than 25 horsepower, operating on the site
for more than two days continuously shall, at a minimum, meet U.S. EPA particulate
matter emissions standards for Tier 4 engines. Where Tier 4 equipment is not available,
exceptions could be made for equipment that includes CARB-certified Level 3 Diesel
ATTACHMENT 3
13
Particulate Filters or equivalent. Equipment that is electrically powered or uses non-
diesel fuels would also meet this requirement.
2. All aerial lifts shall be compressed natural gas (CNG) powered.
Alternatively, the applicant can develop a different plan demonstrating that the off-road
equipment used onsite to construct the project would achieve a fleet-wide average 65-percent
reduction in diesel particulate matter (DPM) exhaust emissions or greater
81. (Mitigation Measure BIO-1) Avoidance of Nesting Birds. Nests of native birds in active use shall
be avoided in compliance with State and federal regulations. Vegetation clearing and
construction shall be initiated outside the bird nesting season (February 1 through August 31) or
preconstruction surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within a minimum of 300 feet
from the project site where access is feasible and no more than seven days prior to any
disturbance. If active nests are encountered (i.e., one containing eggs or young), a work‐
exclusion buffer shall be implemented around the nest commensurate with the nest location and
species. In some cases, buffers may be as small as 25 feet for hidden nests (e.g., in tree or
building cavities) and/or for urban adapted species; buffers may also extend up to 300 feet for
raptors or more sensitive species. No construction activity shall occur within the established
buffer until it is determined by a qualified biologist that the young have fledged (that is, left the
nest) or the nest has become otherwise inactive (e.g. due to predation). At that time the buffer
may be removed and work within the buffer resume.
82. (Mitigation Measure BIO-2) Roosting Bat Habitat Assessment and Surveys: Prior to any tree
removal, a qualified biologist shall conduct a habitat assessment for bats. A qualified bat biologist
shall have: 1) at least two years of experience conducting bat surveys that resulted in detections
for relevant species, such as pallid bat, with verified project names, dates, and references, and
2) experience with relevant equipment used to conduct bat surveys. The habitat assessment
shall be conducted a minimum of 30 to 90 days prior to tree removal and shall include a visual
inspection of potential roosting features (e.g., cavities, crevices in wood and bark, exfoliating
bark, suitable canopy for foliage roosting species). If suitable habitat trees are found, or bats are
observed, mitigation measure BIO-3 shall be implemented
83. (Mitigation Measure BIO-3) Roosting Bat Tree Protections: If the qualified biologist identifies
potential bat habitat trees, then tree trimming and tree removal shall not proceed unless the
following occurs: 1) a qualified biologist conducts night emergence surveys or completes visual
examination of roost features that establishes absence of roosting bats, or 2) tree trimming and
tree removal occurs only during seasonal periods of bat activity, from approximately March 1
through April 15 and September 1 through October 15, and tree removal occurs using the two-
step removal process. Two-step tree removal shall be conducted over two consecutive days.
The first day (in the afternoon), under the direct supervision and instruction by a qualified biologist
with experience conducting two-step tree removal, limbs and branches shall be removed by a
tree cutter using chainsaws only; limbs with cavities, crevices or deep bark fissures shall be
avoided. The second day the entire tree shall be removed.
84. (Mitigation Measure CUL-1) Interpretation and Commemoration of Historic Resources. Prior to
issuance of demolition permit(s), the project sponsor shall undertake the following measures to
document and provide interpretation, commemoration, and salvage of the historic resources to
be demolished, as outlined below:
CUL-1a: Documentation. Prior to issuance of demolition permits, the project sponsor shall
undertake Historic American Building Survey (HABS)/Historic American Landscape Survey
(HALS)–style documentation of the property. The documentation shall be funded by the project
sponsor and undertaken by a qualified professional who meets the standards for history,
architectural history, or architecture (as appropriate) set forth in the Secretary of the Interior’s
Professional Qualification Standards (Code of Federal Regulations title 36, part 61). The
documentation package created shall consist of the items listed below:
ATTACHMENT 3
14
• CUL-1a-1: HABS-style Photographs
• CUL-1a-2: HABS/HALS-style Historical Report
• CUL-1a-3: HALS-style Site Plan
• CUL-1a-4: Video Documentation
The documentation materials shall be offered to state, regional, and local repositories, including
but not limited to, the Northwest Information Center (NWIC)-California Historical Resource
Information System, San Rafael Public Library, the Marin County Free Library’s Anne T. Kent
California Room, and the Marin History Museum. Materials will either be provided in digital or
hard copy formats depending on the capacity and preference of the repository.
CUL-1a-1: HABS-style Photographs. Digital photographs will be taken of the contributing
buildings and landscape elements and the overall character and setting of the historic resource.
All digital photography shall be conducted according to current National Park Service standards
as specified in the National Register Photo Policy Factsheet (updated May 2013). The
photography shall be undertaken by a qualified professional with demonstrated experience in
documentation photography. Large format negatives are not required. The scope of the digital
photographs shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division’s staff for concurrence.
Photograph views for the data set shall include contextual views of the site and each contributing
landscape element and building; elevations of each façade of each building; and detail views of
character-defining features. All photographs shall be referenced on a photographic key map or
site plan. The photographic key shall show the photograph number with an arrow to indicate the
direction of the view.
CUL-1a-2: HABS/HALS-style Historical Report. A written historical narrative and report will
be produced that meets the HABS/HALS Historical Report Guidelines. This HABS/HALS-style
Historical Report may be based on the documentation provided in the 2017 Historic Resource
Evaluation for the site and will include historic photographs and drawings, if available. The written
history shall follow the standard outline format that begins with a statement of significance for
the historic district, describes the architectural and historical context of the district, and includes
descriptions of each contributing building and landscape feature.
CUL-1a-3: HALS-style Site Plan. A HALS-style site plan shall be prepared that depicts the
existing sizes, scale, dimensions, and relative locations of the contributing landscape elements
and buildings related to the historic resource. Particular attention will be paid to the arrangement
and plantings of landscape features that are contributing resources to the historic resource.
Documentation of all plantings is not required, but depiction of the locations and types of mature
trees, and designed hardscape and landscape features shall be included.
CUL-1a-4: Video Recordation. Video recordation shall be undertaken prior to the issuance of
demolition permits. The project sponsor shall undertake a video documenting the historic
resource and its setting. The documentation shall be conducted by a professional videographer,
preferably one with experience recording architectural resources. The documentation shall be
narrated by a qualified professional who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional
Qualification Standards for history, architectural history, or architecture (as appropriate). The
documentation shall include as much information as possible—using visuals in combination with
narration—about the materials, construction methods, current condition, historic use, historic
context, and historic significance of the historic resource. The video documentation shall be
reviewed and approved by the Planning Division’s staff prior to issuance of demolition permits.
CUL-1b: Interpretation. The project sponsor shall provide a permanent display (or multiple
displays) of interpretive materials concerning the history of Aldersly in the Northern California
Danish-American community and the architectural features of the Aldersly Retirement
Community campus as designed in the 1961-1968 master plan by master architect Rex Whitaker
Allen. Interpretation of the site’s history shall be supervised by an architectural historian or
ATTACHMENT 3
15
historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards. The
high-quality interpretive display(s) shall be installed within the project site boundaries, made of
durable, all-weather materials, and positioned to allow for high public visibility and interactivity.
In addition to narrative text, the interpretative display(s) may include, but are not limited to, a
display of photographs, news articles, memorabilia, drawings, and/or video. A proposal
describing the general parameters of the interpretive program shall be approved by the Planning
Division’s staff prior to issuance of building permits. The content, media, and other characteristics
of the interpretive display shall be approved by the Planning Division’s staff prior to issuance of
a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy.
CUL-1c: Salvage. Prior to any demolition or construction activities that would remove character-
defining features of a resource that is a contributor to the historic resource on the project site,
the project sponsor shall consult with a qualified architectural historian or historian who meets
the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards as to whether any such
features may be salvaged, in whole or in part, during demolition/alteration. The project sponsor
shall submit a list of materials that will be salvaged and reused either on the site or within the
interpretive program to the Planning Division for review prior to the beginning of demolition on
the site. The project sponsor shall make a good faith effort to salvage materials of historical
interest to be utilized as part of the interpretative program. No materials shall be salvaged or
removed until HABS/HALS-style recordation and documentation are completed.
85. (Mitigation Measure CUL-2) Conduct Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
Sensitivity and Awareness Training Program Prior to Ground-Disturbing Activities. Prior to
issuance of a building permit, grading permit, or demolition permit involving any potential ground
disturbing activity, all construction contractor(s) responsible for overseeing and operating
ground‐disturbing mechanical equipment (e.g., onsite construction managers and backhoe
operators) shall be required to participate in a cultural resources and tribal cultural resources
sensitivity and awareness training program (Worker Environmental Awareness Program
[WEAP]) for all personnel involved in Project construction, including field consultants and
construction workers. The WEAP shall be developed by an archaeologist that meets the
Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards in archaeology, and by culturally
affiliated Native American tribes.
The WEAP training shall be conducted by an archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the
Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards in archaeology. A representative from the
Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria (FIGR) shall be invited to participate in the training.
The WEAP training shall be conducted before any Project-related construction activities begin at
the Project site. The WEAP will include relevant information regarding sensitive cultural
resources and tribal cultural resources, including applicable regulations, protocols for avoidance,
and consequences of violating State laws and regulations. The WEAP will also describe
appropriate avoidance and impact minimization measures for cultural resources and tribal
cultural resources that could be located at the Project site and will outline what to do and who to
contact if any potential cultural resources or tribal cultural resources are encountered. The WEAP
will emphasize the requirement for confidentiality and culturally appropriate treatment of any
discovery of significance to Native Americans and will discuss appropriate behaviors and
responsive actions, consistent with Native American tribal values.
The project sponsor shall maintain a record of all construction personnel that have received this
training and provide the record to the City. These records shall be submitted to the City prior to
issuance of a building permit involving any ground disturbing activity and shall be maintained by
the applicant throughout the duration of the construction period. A final record shall be submitted
to the City prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
86. (Mitigation Measure CUL-3) Protect Archaeological Resources Identified during Construction.
ATTACHMENT 3
16
The project sponsor shall ensure that construction crews stop all work within 100 feet of the
discovery until a qualified archaeologist and FIGR Tribal Monitor can assess the previously
unrecorded discovery and provide recommendations. Resources could include subsurface
historic features such as artifact-filled privies, wells, and refuse pits, and artifact deposits, along
with concentrations of adobe, stone, or concrete walls or foundations, and concentrations of
ceramic, glass, or metal materials. Native American archaeological materials could include
obsidian and chert flaked stone tools (such as projectile and dart points), midden (culturally
derived darkened soil containing heat-affected rock, artifacts, animal bones, and/or shellfish
remains), and/or groundstone implements (such as mortars and pestles).
87. (Mitigation Measure CUL-4) Protect Human Remains Identified During Construction. In
accordance with the California Health and Safety Code, if the find includes human remains, or
remains that are potentially human, they shall ensure reasonable protection measures are taken
to protect the discovery from disturbance (Assembly Bill [AB] 2641). The archaeologist shall
notify the Marin County Coroner (per § 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code) and the provisions
of § 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, § 5097.98 of the California PRC, and AB
2641 shall be implemented. If the coroner determines the remains are Native American and not
the result of a crime scene, the coroner will notify the NAHC, which then will designate a Native
American Most Likely Descendant (MLD) for the Project (§ 5097.98 of the PRC). The designated
MLD will have 48 hours from the time access to the property is granted to make
recommendations concerning treatment of the remains. If the landowner does not agree with the
recommendations of the MLD, the NAHC can mediate (§ 5097.94 of the PRC). If no agreement
is reached, the landowner shall rebury the remains where they will not be further disturbed (§
5097.98 of the PRC). This shall also include either recording the site with the NAHC or the
appropriate Information Center; using an open space or conservation zoning designation or
easement; or recording a reinternment document with the county in which the property is located
(AB 2641). Work may not resume within the no-work radius until the lead agencies, through
consultation as appropriate, determine that the treatment measures have been completed to
their satisfaction.
88. (Mitigation Measure TCR-1) Survey of Site by Trained Human Remains Detection Dogs. Prior to
the issuance of a grading or building permit, the project sponsor shall provide written evidence
to the City’s Community Development Department that a qualified consultant has been retained
to conduct a survey of the site using trained human remains detection dogs. The survey shall be
performed after the demolition of structures but prior to when trenching, grading, or earthwork
on the site commences. If the survey results in the identification of an area potentially containing
human remains, the area should be avoided. If avoidance is not feasible, then the City shall
require that a professional archaeologist be retained to conduct subsurface testing, in the
presence of a tribal representative from FIGR, to verify the presence or absence of remains. If
human remains are confirmed, then the procedures in the PRC and Mitigation Measure CUL-3
shall be followed.
89. (Mitigation Measure TCR-2) Archaeological and Native American Monitoring and the Discovery
of Cultural Materials and/or Human Remains. Prior to issuance of a grading permit or building
permit, the project sponsor shall retain a Secretary of the Interior-qualified archaeologist, with
input from the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria (FIGR), to prepare a Cultural Resources
Monitoring Plan. Monitoring shall be required during initial ground-disturbing activities and may
be extended should the area be determined to require monitoring of deeper sediments, according
to a schedule outlined in the Cultural Resources Monitoring Plan. The plan shall include (but not
be limited to) the following components:
Person(s) responsible for conducting monitoring activities, including an archaeological
monitor and an appropriate number of FIGR Tribal monitors (number and kind of appropriate
monitors to be determined in consultation with FIGR);
Person(s) responsible for overseeing and directing the monitors;
ATTACHMENT 3
17
How the monitoring shall be conducted and the required format and content of monitoring
reports, including schedule for submittal of monitoring reports and person(s) responsible for
review and approval of monitoring reports;
Protocol for notifications in case of encountering cultural resources, as well as methods of
dealing with the encountered resources (e.g., collection, identification, appropriate
documentation, repatriation); and
Methods to ensure security of cultural resources sites, including protective fencing, security,
and protocol for notifying local authorities (i.e. Sheriff, Police) should site looting or other
resource damaging or illegal activities occur during construction.
During the course of the monitoring, the archaeologist, in consultation with FIGR Tribal monitor,
may adjust the frequency—from continuous to intermittent—based on the conditions and
professional judgment regarding the potential to impact cultural and tribal cultural resources. If
significant tribal cultural resources are identified onsite, all work shall stop immediately within
100 feet of the resource(s).
90. (Mitigation Measure GE0-1) Prior to a grading or building permit submittal, the project sponsor
shall prepare a final geotechnical investigation prepared by a qualified and licensed geotechnical
engineer and submit the report to the City Engineer. Minimum mitigation includes design of new
structures in accordance with the provisions of the current California Building Code or
subsequent codes in effect when final design occurs. Recommended seismic design coefficients
and spectral accelerations shall be consistent with the findings presented in Geotechnical
Investigation prepared by Rockridge Geotechnical, August 31, 2020.
91. (Mitigation Measure GE0-2) Should paleontological resources be encountered during project
subsurface construction activities located in previously undisturbed soil and bedrock, all ground-
disturbing activities within 25 feet shall be halted and a qualified paleontologist contacted to
assess the situation, consult with agencies as appropriate, and make recommendations for the
treatment of the discovery. For purposes of this mitigation, a "qualified paleontologist" shall be
an individual with the following qualifications: 1) a graduate degree in paleontology or geology
and/or a person with a demonstrated publication record in peer- reviewed paleontological
journals; 2) at least two years of professional experience related to paleontology; 3) proficiency
in recognizing fossils in the field and determining their significance; 4) expertise in local geology,
stratigraphy, and biostratigraphy; and 5) experience collecting vertebrate fossils in the field. If
the paleontological resources are found to be significant and project activities cannot avoid them,
measures shall be implemented to ensure that the project does not cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of the paleontological resource. Measures may include monitoring,
recording the fossil locality, data recovery and analysis, a final report, and accessioning the fossil
material and technical report to a paleontological repository. Upon completion of the assessment,
a report documenting methods, findings, and recommendations shall be prepared and submitted
to the City for review. If paleontological materials are recovered, this report also shall be
submitted to a paleontological repository such as the University of California Museum of
Paleontology, along with significant paleontological materials. Public educational outreach may
also be appropriate.
The project applicants shall inform its contractor(s) of the sensitivity of the project site for
paleontological resources and shall verify that the following directive has been included in the
appropriate contract specification documents:
"The subsurface of the construction site may contain fossils. If fossils are encountered during
project subsurface construction, all ground-disturbing activities within 25 feet shall be halted and
a qualified paleontologist contacted to assess the situation, consult with agencies as appropriate,
and make recommendations for the treatment of the discovery. Project personnel shall not collect
or move any paleontological materials. Fossils can include plants and animals, and such trace
fossil evidence of past life as tracks or plant imprints. Marine sediments may contain invertebrate
ATTACHMENT 3
18
fossils such as snails, clam and oyster shells, sponges, and protozoa; and vertebrate fossils such
as fish, whale, and sea lion bones. Vertebrate land mammals may include bones of mammoth,
camel, saber tooth cat, horse, and bison. Contractor acknowledges and understands that
excavation or removal of paleontological material is prohibited by law and constitutes a
misdemeanor under California Public Resources Code, Section 5097.5."
92. (Mitigation Measure NOI-1) Construction Noise. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or
building permit, the project sponsor shall submit a Construction Noise Management Plan (CNMP)
prepared by a qualified acoustical consultant. The CNMP shall identify noise attenuation
measures to further reduce potential impacts related to construction noise. Noise attenuation
measures include, but are not limited to, the following:
a. Installation of a temporary noise barrier along the east and west property lines of the site.
The barrier can be constructed with plywood or another appropriate material with cracks or
no gaps. The purpose of the barrier is to provide a noticeable reduction of the noise and
meet 90 dBA at residential receivers on neighboring properties along the common east and
west property lines, where reasonably feasible. The height of the noise barrier, which may
be up to 12 feet at certain locations, shall take into account the height of the construction
noise sources and site grading and shall be specified in the Construction Noise
Management Plan.
b. All construction equipment shall be equipped with mufflers and sound control devices (e.g.,
intake silencers and noise shrouds) that are in good condition and appropriate for the
equipment.
c. Maintain all construction equipment to minimize noise emissions.
d. Stationary equipment shall be located on the site to maintain the greatest possible distance
to the existing residences, where feasible.
e. Unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines shall be strictly prohibited.
f. Provide advance notification to surrounding land uses disclosing the construction schedule,
including the various types of activities that would be occurring throughout the duration of
the construction period
g. The construction contractor shall provide the name and telephone number of an on-site
construction liaison. If construction noise is found to be intrusive to the community
(complaints are received), the construction liaison shall investigate the source of the noise
and require that reasonable measures be implemented to correct the problem.
h. Schedule high noise-producing activities during times when they would be least likely to
interfere with the noise sensitive activities of the neighboring land use, when possible.
i. Use noise control blankets on temporary fencing that are used to separate construction
areas from occupied on-site areas.
j. Temporarily relocate residents of on-site dwelling units that are very close to the
construction activities.
k. Consider upgrading windows to reduce construction noise at on-site dwelling units closest
to the construction activities.
I, Lindsay Lara, Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly
and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of San Rafael,
ATTACHMENT 3
19
held on Monday, the 5th day of December 2022 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Councilmembers: Bushey, Hill, Kertz, Llorens Gulati & Mayor Kate
NOES: Councilmembers: None
ABSENT: Councilmembers: None
Lindsay Lara, City Clerk
ATTACHMENT 5
CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL
You are invited to attend the City Council hearing on the following project:
DATE/TIME: Monday, December 5, 2022 at 7:00 P.M.
LOCATION: City Council Chambers, City Hall, 1400 Fifth Avenue, San Rafael, CA 94901
VIRTUAL PARTICIPATION
COVID-19 ADVISORY NOTICE: Consistent with State of California and County of Marin health orders, the
San Rafael City Council has determined that the following hearing will be physically open to the public, but
that the public may participate either by attending the meeting in person or by teleconference by visiting
https://www.cityofsanrafael.org/departments/public-meetings/ for the call-in phone number and meeting ID
listed on the agenda, or using Zoom app to connect to this meeting ID.
PROJECT:
326 and 308 Mission Avenue (Aldersly Retirement Community) – Consideration of an ordinance
approving a zoning amendment from Planned Development District (PD1775) to a revised Planned
Development District (PD), and approval of a Master Use Permit, and an Environmental and Design Review
Permit, as recommended by the Planning Commission for the phased development of new buildings and
other improvements, and demolition of existing buildings on the Aldersly Retirement Community property,
including 14 net new Independent Living units. APN: 014-054-31 and -32; Peter Schakow, Owner; Applicant:
Peter Lin, Greenbrier Development; File No(s).: ZC20-001, UP20-022, ED 20-051 & IS20-003.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
State law (California Environmental Quality Act or CEQA) requires that this project be reviewed to determine
if a study of potential environmental effects is required. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been
prepared pursuant to the requirements of CEQA (Pub. Res. Code §21000 et seq.) and the CEQA Guidelines
(14 Cal. Code Regs. §§15000 to 15387). The City Council will consider certification of the Final EIR prepared
for the project at this meeting.
WHAT WILL HAPPEN:
Staff will provide a presentation, members of the public can provide comments/questions, and the City
Council will consider all public testimony, deliberate, and determine how to proceed with the
recommendation provided by staff and the Planning Commission on the project applications.
IF YOU CANNOT ATTEND:
You may submit comments regarding the proposed item by 4:00 p.m. the day of the hearing to Lindsay Lara,
City Clerk, City of San Rafael, 1400 Fifth Avenue, San Rafael, CA 94901, or by email to
city.clerk@cityofsanrafael.org. You can also hand deliver a letter prior to the public hearing. The City Clerk’s
office will forward your comments to the City Council and publish correspondence received to the agenda
online. Comments received after 4:00 p.m. will be forwarded to the City Council and posted online the
following day.
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Visit the project webpage: https://www.cityofsanrafael.org/aldersly/
or contact Jayni Allsep, Project Planner at (415) 706-0443 or jayni.allsep@cityofsanrafael.org. You can
also come to the Planning Division office, located in City Hall, 1400 Fifth Avenue, to look at the electronic file
for the proposed project. The office is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Monday through Thursday and 8:30
a.m. to 12:30 p.m. on Friday. You can also view the staff report after 4:00 p.m. on the Friday before the
meeting at https://www.cityofsanrafael.org/city-council-meetings/
/s/ Lindsay Lara
Lindsay Lara
City Clerk
City of San Rafael
To be published in the Marin IJ on: [Saturday, November 19, 2022]