HomeMy WebLinkAboutCD General Plan 2020 AmendmentAgenda Item No: 4a `
Meeting Date: July 18, 2011
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Department: Community Development
Prepared by: Linda M. Jackson
City Manager Approval.
SUBJECT: Consideration ofdraft amendments toSan Rafael General Plan 3U2Ocovering: anUpdate of
the Housing Element; amendments to Conservation Element Policy CON -3 (Unavoidable Filling of
Wetlands); amendments to policies, programs and text related hothe Project Selection Process (PSP);
and oNew Sustainability Element (GPA 11-O01)(CD)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council:
a. Adopt a resolution adopting an Addendum to the San Rafael General Plan 2020 Final
Environmental Impact Report; and
b. Adopt aresolution adopting General Plan Amendment GPA 11-OO1
BACKGROUND:
The City ofSan Rafael has initiated anamendment tothe San Rafael General Plan 2O20(GPA11-801).
The proposed General Plan Amendment is grouped into four distinct components, which are:
~ Anupdate ofthe Housing Element
*
Proposed revisions to Conservation Element Policy CON -3 (Unavoidable Filling of Wetlands)
Deletion of Plan policies, programs and references eliminating the Project Selection Process
Concurrent with the adoption of the Sustainability Element, staff recommends adoption of a Greenhouse
Gas (GHG) Emissions Reduction Strategy, which is not a component of General Plan Amendment
GPA1 1 -001, but rather an implementing program. The City Council will review the draft reduction strategy
as a separate agenda item following review of the draft Sustainability Element.
Consistent with State law, an Addendum to the General Plan Final EnvironmentalImpact Report
amendments was prepared and will be considered as part of the review of the proposed amendments.
The Planning Commission has recommended adoption of the Addendum by the City Council. The
Council's draft resolution toadopt the Addendum isinAttachment 1.
The four components have been reviewed by the General Plan 2020 Focus Group and other community
groups and interested parties over the past year, and by the Planning Commission at its June meetins.
The Planning Commission concluded its review ofGeneral Plan Anlendment(�PA11-OO1onJune 28~
with a unanimous recommendation to the City Council to adopt the proposed amendments (see
Attachment 2).
File No.: 1115 /
Council Meeting: -
Disposition: /y
&5n L 07 e6A1 P1 /32n-
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT 2
The City Council July 5 m study session included an introduction to the four components of the general
plan amendments.
A detailed description of each component to General Plan Amendment GPA1 1-001 isprovided below,
Update ofHousing Element
All local agencies in California are required to periodically review and update its General Plan Housing
Element. In fact, the currently adopted San Rafael General Plan 2020 Housing Element includes the
following programs to track progress on the element and compliance with the State mandate:
H- a. Annual Housing E|unomnt Review. Provide and annual assessment ofhousing
element implementation through annual review of the General Plan 2020. Provide
opportunities for public input and discussion, in conjunction with State requirements,
H -5a. Housing Element Update. Undertake housing element updates as required by law
or generally every five years.
In 2010, a first draft of the Housing Element Update was completed and forwarded to the State of California
Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). Following HC0 staff review and nornnnent, o
second draft of the Housing Bement Update was prepared and published in March 2011. Acopy of the
draft Housing Element ioavailable at the City ofSan Rafael website, which can beaccessed at:
http://www.citvofsanrafael.ora/Government/Citv Clerk/Public Meeting Agendas and Videos.htm
The proposed amendments to the Housing Element are presented in undedine/strikooutfonnsd (see
Attachment 2, Exhibit Al and Exhibit A2). A summary of the key changes is as follows:
1� Housing goals and strategies are expanded to reinforce land use patterns that support lifestyles that will
reduce reliance on carbon -based transportation. Some policies and programs are expanded toaddress
standards and tools for promoting housing around the Downtown and Civic Center transit hubs,
2 The time frames for implementing certain Housing Element programs have been updated and
revised.
3. A number ofelement policies and programs are proposed for amendment hn expand sources and
resources for housing subaidies, gnsnta, trust funds and alike.
4. A new Program H -11f is added to recognize zoning ordinance requirements that applicants/
developers provide relocation assistance for low-income residential unit renters displaced by new
development.
5. Existing Program H'16d (Emergency Shelters) and new Program H -16e (Transitional and Supportive
Housing) are amended and added. /enpentive|y, to respond to the State mandate ofS82.
& New Program H -18o is proposed to encourage the use of the CEC)A Guidelines exemptions for in -fill
residential development, whenever possible, consistent with State law,
7. An amendment to Program H -18Q (Revisions to Parking Standards) is proposed to increase flexibility
in parking requirements for housing developments.
8, Existing Program H -22a (High Density Infill Housing Near Transit) and new Program H'22b (Station
Area Plans) are amended and addad, reapeotive|y, to address housing for the Onvvntovvn and Civic
Center SMART station area plans.
Q� New Programs H -25d (Required Parking for Second Dvva||in0 Units). H -25e (City Foes to Reduce
Second Dwelling Unit Costs) and H -25f (Detached Second Dwelling Unit Stook Plans) are proposed
to study ways for increasing the stock and reducing the costs of second dwelling units.
1& Some programs are proposed to be deleted because they have been: a) implemented; b) replaced or
are obsolete; or c) deleted due to funding cuts.
11, The Housing Bement Background Report (General Plan Appendix 8) has been revised to incorporate
updated data on popu|ation, housing, incomes; household characteristics; and S132 requirements
(zoning obligations to accommodate housing for the homeless). This report hos been reorganized to
match the State of California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) format.
Further, the list of housing sites in this report have been updated to consistent with state |avva.
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 3
specifically listing sites that are presently zoned or planned to accommodate residential land use
offering densities of up to 30 dwelling units per acre.
In addition to the above, the Housing Element Update includes some new references to other
implementing programs, and anumber ofgeneral and grammatical edits.
The Housing Element Update does not result inany ofthe following:
w Changes to the adopted residential land use designations or their respective density parameters
• Changes to the adopted land use designations for individual properties/sites
w Changes inthe housing projections honnthosep jecdonspub|ishedinthmounenUyoduptedHouaing
Element
The primary topic for City Council consideration will be identification of site(s) for a homeless shelter that may
be developed without a use permit, as required by State law S132. The new State law also provides that a City
may require a shelter complies with a limited number and type of specific performance standards.
After consultation with a number of community groups, four potential areas were identified an sites for
'homeless shelter zoning,' Described on page 33 of the Housing Background (Exhibit A2), these sites are
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 4
The Planning Commission considered the four sites and recommended the following priorities to the City
Council for 'homeless shelter zoning.' The #1 site was ranked highest by the most Connmiooionens, and
the last two sites tied as #3.
7site
Zoning
Location
Size (acres)
Characteristics
Single -story light industrial or office
1
LI/O and other
South of Bellam and
70
Vacant buildings available for reuse.
Districts
east of highway 580
Served by transit.
Close to Wellness Center, and to
services for the homeless.
2
Medium Density
Site at the Helen Vine
Center/former Honor
1.5
Vacant buildings available for reuse.
Farm
Would require shuttle service.
Single -story light industrial or office
Park
Vacant buildings available for reuse.
Limited transit.
3
Publicly -owned
Marin County Civic
129
Site has undeveloped and surface
P/QP site
Center
parking areas, Served by transit,
State law requires that sufficient area be coned for a shelter to meet the City's housing need for the
homeless. Each of the sites shown above is sufficient to meet this standard. For onmparison, two
homeless shelters in San Rafael provide housing for people on sites smaller than a half acre:
0 Mill Street Shelter —4Oresidents, 0.33acre insize
* Family Resource Center — 25 families, 0.2 acre in size
As can be seen in the table above, all four of the sites forwarded to the City Council are at least one acre
in size and three are considerably larger; all are large enough to allow a shelter for at least 79 beds.
With Council's determination of an SB2 site(s) at the Council nneedng, staff will bring the implementing
draft zoning amendments and padbnnanca standards to the Planning Commission for consideration and
recommendation toCouncil.
New Sustainability Element and Supportive Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Strategy
During preparation ofthe City's Climate Change Action Plan staff indicated tothe City Council
and the Green Ribbon Committee that the programs contained in the CCAP would be added to General
Plan 2020 during the next update process, The intention was to assure that the CCAP programs have the
same importance, application and long-term monitoring as other general plan policies.Rather than scatter
the CCAP programs throughout the general plan in various elements, staff concluded that it would be
preferable to prepare a new Sustainability Element for inclusion in General Plan 2020 to provide
background and context to the issues of community sustainability and effects of climate change. Since
the concepts of sustainability constitute an ^umbna||a^ otnahmQy for community p|anning, staff proposes that
the Sustainability Element be included as the first element within General Plan 2020.
The draft Sustainability Element (Attachment 2.Exhibit B)was largely authored bvocommunity
vo|unbaer, Pat Jung, who is a local landscape architect and graduate of the Dominican University's
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 5
The programs contained in the CCAP have been reformatted in some cases as policies, others have
been modified to reflect wording changes and a few additional programs contained in the new GHG
Emissions Reduction Strategy (Strategy distributed to the Planning Commission and summarized in a
separate staff report).
At its meeting of June 14. 2011, the Planning Commission reviewed and discussed adraft Sustainability
Element, offering anumber ofsuggestions for edits. The Sustainability Element has been revised to
incorporate these edits and is provided in its entirety in Exhibit B, which is part of the attached draft
naan|ubon (Attachment 2). A number ofproposed edits were also offered by Bill Carney, President of
Sustainable San Rafae/, which have also been incorporated.
More significant revisions include:
• On Page 4, text has been added to clarify that programs contained in the CCAP are intended to
achieve a1596GHGreduction goal by2O2U.and that the additional 1096^strotoh^goal ioexpected to
beachieved through additional community actions and federal programs.
~ The program titled, "Home and Community Gardens" has been relocated under SU -7, Local Food
Production.
• The language of SU -9, Zero Waste, has been revised to address all three components of waste
reduction discussed inthe CCAP:source reduction, reuse and recycling.
* A new program SU -9a has been added directing the City to adopt a Zero Waste Goal and Strategic
Plan, which ieoCCAPprogram and actions which are currently inprocess.
* A new program SU -9i, Commercial and Multi -Family Recycling, has also been added since adoption
of this ordinance is also in process.
° A now program 8U -2b. Car -Share Pvogrann, was added, similar to SU -2n which oa||o for
consideration of the feasibility of a bike sharing program for San Rafael to reduce vehicle use and
ownership.
w The Sustainability Indicator (page 12) related to Zero Waste has been modified to quantify the
material diversion nate consistent with the Marin Hazardous and Solid VVaaba JPA'sZero Waste
Feasibility Study and with the calculations contained in our GHG Emissions Reduction Strategy.
Finally, Commissioner Paul suggested that Policy SU -8 and Program SU -8a related to social equity do
not sufficiently address opportunities for the economically disadvantaged members of our community.
Since the primary intent of the preparation of the Sustainability Element was to incorporate programs from
the CCAP.this portion ofthe draft element isquite limited. |tisimportant tonote, however, that the
Sustainability Element does not cover all policies and programs related to the broad topics and objectives
of sustainability. As noted on Page 5 of the draft element, several existing General Plan elements
address these topics aewell. Specifically:
~ The Housing Element identifies the scope of needed housing for our diverse community and specific
objectives and programs related tothe provision of affordable housing (see policies H-13. H'14, H-16.
H'17, H-19. H-20. H-21. H-24. and H'25).
• The Economic Vitality Element addresses objectives for job creation to match the local workforce
(Policy EV -4 and EV -8), workforce education (EV -1 0) and creation of housing affordable to the local
workforce (EV -12).
Staff has examined general plans from other public agencies, including the County of Marin's Countywide
Plan, which iaorganized around sustainability principles. VVecould not identify additional policies or
programs that would be tangible and implementable efforts that would go beyond our existing General
Plan policies and programs. During the public discussions related tothe Target application there were
suggestions of adoption of a living wage ordinance, which would mandate higher -wage jobs either
associated with government contracting or applicable to the entire business sector. Afew cities in
California have enacted such ordinances, but momentum toextend such provisions toadditional
jurisdictions has slowed significantly due to the economic recession and concerns about impacting the
financial viability ofexisting businesses,
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 6
Amendment to Conservation Element Policy CON -3 (Unavoidable Filling of Wetlands)
Since 1QO7.the City ofSan Rafael has had mandated wetland protection policies inits General Plan. |n
2004, the City adopted the General Plan 2020, which re -vamped the Conservation Element. Policy CON -3,
which addresses the protection of wetlands through avoidance, was among the policies that were amended.
However, since adoption, application of this policy has proved to be challenging in reviewing development
projects that have involved wetland protection and proposed wetland fill. Specifically, the policy provides
little flexibility in interpreting 'avoidance' and the terms such ae'hydrologically isolated' and 'historic
drainages' have been difficult to define and interpret, and have been problematic in their application of
actual site and wetland conditions. |twas determined that the policy text warranted refinement toprovide
better clarity, minimize inconsistent interpretation and address problematic conditions and terms without
compromising the purpose or intent to protect and preserve wetlands. See the attached memorandum
(Attachment 3), which summarizes the research and outreach completed to assist in amending this policy.
The following amendments are proposed to Policy CON -3, which involved consultation with and input from
the San Rafael General Plan 2020 Focus Group and representatives of the Marin Conservation League:
CON -3. Unavo-dabble F4fing of W-etfan Wetland Protection and Mit�qation for
Unavoidable Fill. In order to protect and preserve valued wetlands, Llos of wetlands
due to filling should -shall he avoided, unless it is not possible or practica. Any^/ee�xe*�
for fill must demonstrate that the proposed fig cannot be avoided. if fig ;S unavoidable,
there shag be a GOmpensa
site��. When it is demonstrated that it is not possible or practical to avoid filling a
wetiand because of site constraints and conditions such as the geo_qra,2hic location of the
wetiand, site confiquration and size, require that the wetiand be replaced on-site, and in
kind at a minimum ratio of 2:1 Le.q., 2 acres for each acre lost ). If it is determined that
on-site miti�qation is not possible or practical, off-site mit4gation shall be reguired at a
minimum replacement ratio of 3:1. As assessed and determined on a case-by-cas
��Lhe-The City may waive this policy for fill of a-smu Yacre mless in
mvidedthat-the
the appliGapt is in GOMphianGe with reqi4 ents of other a ---- ;e- t"t regulate wetlands—
(1) the wetland is isolated meaning that it is not within, LaWof �irectly connected with
or hyrdologically-linked by natural flow to a creek, draina-geway, wetiand or submerge
tidelands: (2) it is demonstrated bv a wetiand expert that thenreservation of the wetiand
is not practical as it would not result in a functioning, biological resource because of its
isolation; (3) the City has determined that filling would result in a more avoropriate and
desirable site plan for the proiect: and (4) the City consults with and considers comments
received from the appropriate resource aqencies with wetland oversiaht (State of
California Department of Fish and Game andlor the California Regional Water Quality
QontMLBgqLdL
Please note that as a result of comments from the Planning Commission at the June 14, 2011 Study
Session, minor amendments were made to the policy text. The minor revision r|ehfieo that the wetland
expert's role is solely for the purpose of rendering a decision on the practicality of preserving an isolated
In response to a recommendation made by representatives of the Marin Conservation League, it was
determined that the Conservation Element should include a brief definition of wetlands. The following
Wetland- Areas under the iurisdiction of the US Army Coms of Enclineers that are
inundated or saturated by surface or -groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient
to support a prevalence of vegetation that is typically adaptive for life in saturated soils
conditions. Wetlands generally include but are not limited to seasonal wetlands. marshes,
vernal pools and bog ,
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 7
Elimination of Project Selection Process (PSP)
Contained in the San Rafael General Plan 2020 are policies and programs addressing the City's Project
Selection Process (PSP). Initially established in 1988 as the PPP (Project Priority Procedure), the PSP is
essentially a competition process for new land development projects. Because of limited short-term traffic
capacity in many areas of San Rafael, and the time frame for funding and constructing needed, long-term
needed transportation improvements for these areas, the PSP was established as an equitable way to
allocate the limited, short-term traffic capacity to selective, high priority land development projects. The
PSP requires that new land development projects to compete against one another to secure an allocation
of limited traffic capacity. The competition process is periodically initiated and hosted by the City,
generally when there are multiple, pending land development projects proposed and/or when there is
general interest in new land development in an area where traffic capacity is limited. As part of the
competition, development projects are required to propose a public benefit so as to obtain a "high priority"
rating, which is necessary to secure a traffic allocation. A high priority rating is generally reserved for
projects that are high tax -generating, propose a high percentage of affordable housing or propose a
needed neighborhood -serving use.
The PSP does not grant an entitlement to develop or build, nor is it a permit that vests land development
approvals. Rather, the PSP merely grants a "placeholder" of traffic allocation to a development project,
which is valid for two years. If the required land use entitlements or planning and building permits are not
secured for the development project during this two-year window, the PSP expires, and the project is
required to complete again for an allocation of traffic capacity. The traffic allocation that is granted by this
process is not considered a "project" under the CEQA Guidelines and is therefore, not subject to
environmental review.
The PPP and the PSP were critical when the potential for land development was high (1980's -early
2000's) and there was inadequate traffic capacity in the road network to accommodate the land
development demand. During these years, the PPP and PSP were successful in approving high priority
projects and yielding many public benefits offered by these projects including, among others:
contributions to fund the establishment of a landscape median on Manuel T. Freitas Parkway (at
Northgate Drive)-; obtaining a 50 -year land lease (at $1.00/year) for the City Corporation Yard site;
contributions to fund technology training and programs sponsored by the Canal Alliance; and many
affordable housing units in new residential developments. However, the process has "run -its -course" and
no longer serves as a critical tool for the City in that: a) the community is now largely built -out and there
are very few remaining land development opportunities and large undeveloped/underdeveloped sites; b)
over time, the process did not result in yielding much more public benefit than the amount that could be
obtained through the conventional project review process; and c) the limited traffic capacity has either
been used up or needed transportation improvements have been implemented.
The PSP is specifically addressed in Land Use Element Policy LU -3 and Program LU -3a, which read as
follows:
LU -3. Project Selection Process. Because there is limited traffic capacity, and in order
to achieve desired projects with significant public benefit, prioritize and allocate that traffic
capacity among development proposals citywide. Establish criteria to guide the City's
selection of high priority projects.
LU -3a. Project Selection Process. Establish a citywide Project Selection Process (PSP)
to approve projects consistent with citywide and neighborhood -specific priorities. Include
criteria to guide the City's selection of high priority projects. Involve the public in drafting
the initial PSP program and criteria. Include public notification and involvement in the
implementation of PSP program.
The PSP is also referenced and cited in a number of other General Plan elements, as well as the Housing
Element Background report. A complete list of the text amendments addressing elimination of PSP is
provided in the Exhibit D of the attached, draft resolution (Attachment 2).
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 8
Adoption of GPA11-001
It is proposed that the amendments summarized above be adopted as a single amendment action to
General Plan 2020. This single action will be presented in one resolution for City Council
consideration (Attachment 2). Consistent with City Council Resolution No. 8379, the appropriate agencies
and jurisdictions have been notified of the proposed General Plan Amendment.
ANALYSIS
San Rafael General Plan 2020 Consistency
The collective components of General Plan Amendment GPA1 1-001 have been reviewed for consistency
with the San Rafael General Plan 2020. The following provides a brief summary of how each component
ioconsistent with the San Rafael General Plan 2O2O:
1. Overall, the amended Housing Element would be consistent with: a) Housing Element Program H-1 a
(Annual Housing Element Review) as it presents an updated assessment of housing conditions, data
and issues, and provides opportunities for public input and discussion; b) Housing Element Program
H -5a as it represents a 5 -year update of this element, as required by State law.
The new Sustainability Element introduces policies and programs that would be consistent with many
currently -adopted policies and programs in General Plan 2020 that are intended to address
sustainability, which include, among others: Housing Element Program H-1 1 c (Rehabilitation and
Energy Loan Program) and Policy H-14 (innovative Housing Approaches), Policy H-22 (Infill Near
Transit), Program H -22a (Higher Density Infill Housing Near Transit); Neighborhood Element Policy
NH -6 (Bicycle- and Pedestrian- Friendly Streets), NH -30 (Pedestrian Environments), NH -86 (Design
Considerations for Development in the Vicinity of the Civic Center, NH -88 (Sonoma Marin Area Rail
Transit — SMART Station); Economic Vitality Element Policy EV -6 (Shop Locally), Policy EV -1 1
(Promotion ofWorkplace A|harnativea). Policy EV -12 (Workforce Housing); Circulation Element Policy
C-1 1 (Alternative Transportation Mode Users), Program C-1 1 b (Car Sharing), Program C-1 1 c (Low
Impact Alternative Vehicles), Policy C-1 2 (Transportation Demand Management), Policy C-1 5 (Transit
Needs).Policy C'17(Regional Transit Options).Policy C-20(Intermodal Transit Huba).Policy C -2G
(Bicycle Plan Implementation), Policy C-27 (Pedestrian Plan Implementation), Policy C-32 (Parking
for Alternative Modes of Transportation), Infrastructure Element Policy 1-8 (Street Trees); Safety
Element Policy S-20(Levee Upgrading), and Policy S-21 (Rise in Sea Level).
3. The amendment to Conservation Element Policy CON -3 and the addition of a definition for'wetland'
would beconsistent and not inconflict with: a)Policy CON -1 inthat important environmental
resources would continue to be protected: b) Policy CON -2 in that the importance of wetland
preservation would not change nor would the amendments compromise this importance; and c) Goal
31 in that the overall goal to protect habitat would not be impacted. Wetland protection and
preservation has been of utmost priority to the City of San Rafael and the proposed amendment to
Policy CON -3 and the addition of a definition for wetland would not change this priority, but would
reinforce the current wetland goals and policies of the Conservation Element.
4. The Project Selection Process (PSP) has provided an effective and equitable way of distributing
limited traffic capacity to development projects in traffic -sensitive areas. Discontinuing the Project
Selection Process would not conflict with Land Use Element Policy LU -2 (Development Timing) and
Program LU -2a (Development Review), or Circulation Element Policy C-5 (Traffic Level of Service) or
Program C -5D (Evaluation of Project Merits). As discussed above, the PSP grants a traffic allocation
to a development project for a limited period of time and it is not a land use or development
entitlement that insubject toenvironmental review. The above referenced policies and programs
would continue to review land development and their associated environmental impactsonaoase-by-
casebasis.
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 9
Consultation with Local Native American Tribe as Required by SB 18
Consistent with SB1 8, when processing a General Plan Amendment, the City must consult with the local
Native American tribe todetermine if there ininterest inTribal Consultation. Anoffer ofTribal Consultation
was made to but the City did not receive a response from the local tribe (Federation Indians of Graton
Roncheria).
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Pursuant to the California Environmental Act (CEQA) Guidelines, a General Plan Amendment action is
subject to environmental review. As CEQA Guidelines Section 15152 encourage 'tiering' from a certified
Environmental Impact Report, the proposed components of the General Plan Amendment were carefully
reviewed against the San Rafael General Plan 2020 certified Environmental Impact Report (Plan EIR),
2004. Based on this review and the completion of an Initial Study and consistent with the provisions of the
CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, staff prepared an Addendum to the Plan EIR (Addendum No. 2). The
Addendum concludes that proposed General Plan Amendment GPA1 1-001 would not result in: any new
significant impacts; an increase in the severity of the impacts; or new or expanded mitigation measures
from those analyzed and determined in the General Plan 2020 FEIR. The attached resolution
(Attachment 1) is the recommended City Council action to adopt the EIR Addendum.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The Sustainability Element includes a program for annual review which will require some reallocation of
staff time to accomplish on a timely basis. There are no additional significant estimated costs to or
resulting from the proposed amendments.
OPTIONS:
o. Adopt General Plan Amendment GPA11'OO1asrecommended;
b. Adopt additional amendments in the action of adopting General Plan Amendment GPA1 1 -
001; or
c� Refer General Plan Amendment GPA1 1-001 back to staff and the General Plan Advisory
Committed for changes and additional amendments.
ACTION REQUIRED:
1. Adopt Resolution adopting an Addendum to the San Rafael General Plan Final Environmental
Impact Report (Attachment 1).and
2. Adopt Resolution adopting General Plan Amendment GPA 11-U01 (Attachment 2).
EXHIBITS
Attachment 1: Draft Resolution adopting an Addendum to the San Rafael General Plan 2020 Final
Environmental Impact Report (Addendum No. 2);
Attachment 2: Draft Resolution adopting General Plan Amendment GPA11-001 with the following
attachments:
Exhibit Al and A2: Draft Housing Element and Background (Appendix B)
Exhibit B: Draft new Sustainability Element
Exhibit C: Draft amendments to Conservation Element Policy CON -3 and addition of
wetland definition
Exhibit O: Draft amendments deleting policies, programs and text references tothe
Project Selection Process (P8P)
Attachment 3: Memorandum toLinda Jackson from Paul Jensen summarizing research and
recommendations for amending Conservation Element Policy CON -3, August 23, 2010
Attachment 4-1 Public Hearing Notice
The following document was distributed to the City Council with this staff report and is available at the
Community Development Deportment
Addendum (No. 2) to the San Rafael General Plan 2020 Certified Environmental Impact Report