HomeMy WebLinkAboutCD SR Airport Recreational Facility Project 2014.02carr 0100�4" Agenda Item No: 5.a
Meeting Date: February 3, 2014
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Department: Community Development
Prepared by: Paul A. Jensen, Director [KT]
City Manager Approval —AA
SUBJECT: San Rafael Airport Recreational Facility — 397 & 400 Smith Ranch Road — Consider an
amendment to Master Use Permit (UP05-08), approved on December 17, 2012, to modify Conditions of
Approval #38 and #39 governing hours of operation and add Condition of Approval #62 addressing
building safety measures for the approved 85,700 -square -foot recreational building and outdoor fields
project, located on a 16.6 -acre portion of the San Rafael Airport. This amendment is being proposed in
response to the terms of a Settlement Agreement between the City of San Rafael, the San Rafael Airport
LLC (property owner) and Gallinas Defense Council, Inc.; APN: 155-230-10 thru 16; PD 1909 -WO
District; San Rafael Airport LLC, owner/applicant; File No: UP13-050. (Continued from the January 21,
2014 Meeting)
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt the attached resolution to approve amendments to the San Rafael Airport Recreational Facility
Master Use Permit UP05-08, as recommended by the City Council at its January 21, 2014 meeting.
BACKGROUND:
At its January 21, 2014 meeting the City Council conducted a public hearing to consider amendments to
the San Rafael Airport Recreational Facility project, as described above. The ,City Council moved to
approve amendments to conditions 39 and 62, as presented (which reflect the terms of the settlement
agreement reached on this project) and directed staff to revise condition 38. As proposed, the condition
would be amended to allow the applicant to request an extension of the indoor facility hours of operation
after one year of full operation, subject to the conduct of a noise study and considering input of residents
most affected by the project. The matter was continued for consideration of the revised resolution at the
next regular City Council meeting.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project, as revised based on the January 21, 2014 recommendations of the City Council includes
revision to Condition 39 (Outdoor Use Hours) and the addition of Condition 62 (Additional Safety
Measures), which have been made to be consistent with the terms of the Settlement Agreement as
discussed in the prior staff report. Minor revisions to update Master Use Permit Conditions No.'s 1, 14 and
19 were also proposed, and are included in the draft resolution Exhibit 1 (with changes shown in strikeout
and underline text).
Additionally, Condition 38 has been proposed to be revised consistent with the direction of the City
Council, as follows:
FOR CITY CLERK ONLY
File No.
Council Meeting:
A;
Disposition: ' '
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 2
38. Indoor use Hours: The hours of operation for the indoor recreational uses and ancillary uses shall be
as follows:
a. 9:00 A.M. to 10:30 P.M., Sunday to Thursday and Federally designated holidays (weekdays).
b. 9:00 A.M. to 11:00 P.M., Friday and Saturday (weekends)
c. Saturday and Sunday hours of operation can start at 8:00 A.M. during the winter season
(November 1 to May 15)
One (1) year following occupancy and full operation of the indoor facility, the applicant may submit a
request to allow the indoor use to remain open until 11:00 PM on weekdays and 12:00 AM on
weekends. Prior to submitting such a request the applicant shall pay the cost for the City of San
Rafael to select and hire a qualified noise consultant to measure intermittent and constant noise
levels generated while the indoor facility is operating. The noise measurements shall be taken
between 9:30 PM and 11:00 PM (nighttime) on at least three weekday evenings and two weekend
evenings during peak season operations. Noise measurements shall be documented near the bridge
crossing over North Gallinas Creek and adjacent to the contiguous Contempo Marin and Captains
Cove residential neighborhoods to demonstrate if the nighttime noise levels experienced at the
nearest residential property boundaries (while the indoor facility is operating) are in compliance with
the following City of San Rafael Municipal Code Table 8.13-1 — General Noise Limits:
50 dBA Intermittent
40 dBA Constant
Upon submittal of a request for extension and completion of the required noise analysis, the City
Council shall hold a noticed public hearing on the request. The decision should be largely based
upon, but not limited to, the following:
1) The extent to which the recreational facility is operating within the City of San Rafael
Municipal Code General Noise Limits.
2) The extent to which intermittent or unusual loud noises have been documented as a result of
the facility activities, e.g., loud car radios, excessive vehicle speeds, groups of people
gathering in the parking lot or using the access roadway/pedestrian pathways at night, or
noise from inside the building extending outdoors, etc.
3) Testimony received from adjacent residents in Captains Cove and Contempo Marin that
would be most affected by the project nighttime noise.
4) Any efforts that have been and/or could be made by the operator to mitigate any documented
nuisance noise impacts.
The decision of the City Council shall be made by adoption of a resolution, and may be subject to
additional restrictions, limitations or conditions related to any permitted extension of the facility
operating hours. The cost of processing the request for extension of hours shall be paid by the
applicant.
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 3
OPTIONS:
The City Council has the following options available for action on this project:
1. Adopt the revised Resolution on Consent (staff recommendation);
2. Adopt the Resolution with further revisions;
3. Continue the matter to future City Council meeting for further review and discussion; or
4. Deny the request to amend the Master Use Permit conditions.
ACTIONS REQUIRED:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the draft resolution to approve the amendments to the San
Rafael Airport Recreational Facility Master Use Permit, as presented in Exhibit 1.
EXHIBITS:
1. Resolution Approving Master Use Permit Amendment UP13-050
Exhibit 1
It 06m 6391
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL APPROVING UP13-50, AS AN
AMENDMENT TO MASTER USE PERMIT NO. UP05-08 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, FOR
THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 85,700 -SQUARE -FOOT RECREATIONAL BUILDING, TWO
OUTDOOR FIELDS, AND ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS, LANDSCAPING AND
PARKING ON A VACANT PORTION OF THE 119.5 -ACRE SAN RAFAEL AIRPORT PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 397-400 SMITH RANCH ROAD (SAN RAFAEL AIRPORT RECREATIONAL
FACILITY PROJECT)
(APN'S: 155-230-10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 AND 16)
ZC05-01, UP05-08, ED05-15
WHEREAS, on December 17, 2012, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 13479 making
findings and approving a master environmental and design review permit no. ED05-15 and master use
permit no. UP05-08 approving a new recreational facility project at the San Rafael Airport property,
located off Smith Ranch Road in North San Rafael; and
WHEREAS, on December 17, 2012, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 13477 that
certified the San Rafael Recreational Facility Project FEIR; and
WHEREAS, on December 17, 2012, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 13478 adopting
CEQA Findings of Fact and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project; and
WHEREAS, on January 7, 2013, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1909 establishing new
planned development district (PD) zoning standards for the site that included development of the subject
recreational facility and uses; and
WHEREAS, on January 17, 2013, Gallinas Creek Defense Council, Inc. (Petitioners) filed a
petition for writ of mandate in Marin County Superior Court challenging the City's Approvals pursuant
to CEQA; and
WHEREAS, as required by CEQA, the City, Petitioners and the San Rafael Airport LLC
(Airport) thereafter engaged in settlement negotiations; and
WHEREAS, on September 18, 2013, the parties entered into a Settlement Agreement (i.e., CA
Superior Court, Marin County, Stipulation for Dismissal Case No CIV1300259, Settlement Agreement)
whereby the Airport property owner agreed to limit the evening hours of operation for the outdoor fields
and artificial lighting to 9 p.m. every day of the year and to implement additional safety measures from
the list of `Optional Building Design Measures' contained in the May 16, 2012 letter prepared by the
City's Airport Safety Consultant, Mead & Hunt. In conjunction with the required decrease in outdoor
night time operations, the parties agreed that the Airport property owner may seek approval from the
City to allow the indoor facility to remain open until 11 p.m. Sundae through Thursday and 12 a.m. on
Fridays and Saturdays; and
WHEREAS, On November 5, 2013, pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement the
Airport filed an application for use permit amendment (UP13-050) to request extension of the indoor
Exhibit 1
hours of operation and incorporation of the reduction in hours to the outdoor field use and inclusion of
additional building safety as identified in the Settlement Agreement; which has resulted in proposed
modifications to current Use Permit UP05-08 Conditions of Approval No.'s 1, 14, 19, 38, 39 and 62
addressing the hours of operation and construction safety measures, and superseding current ED05-15
condition 68; and
WHEREAS, the amendments to the project do not materially change the project scope as
evaluated by the EIR, and all the findings for approval of the project contained in Resolution 13479
remain valid and cover the subject revisions to the aforementioned conditions of approval; and
WHEREAS, on January 21, 2014, the City of San Rafael City Council held a duly -noticed public
hearing on the proposed amendment request, accepting all oral and written public testimony and the
written report of the Community Development Department staff; and
WHEREAS, on a 5-0 vote (motion by Councilmember McCullough) the Council moved to
continue the matter for consideration on its consent calendar at the next regular City Council meeting
with the intent to approve the revisions to conditions 39 and 62 as presented, and condition 38 as with
modifications as discussed; and
WHEREAS, on February 3, 2014, the City of San Rafael City Council reviewed and considered
the revised resolution, with changes consistent with its direction on January 21, 2014.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council adopts the following findings to
approve the Master Use Permit Amendment to the Recreational Facility at the San Rafael Airport
conditions of approval:
Findings for Approval - Master Use Permit (UP13-050)
A. The proposed amendments to the indoor and outdoor recreational facility use, as conditioned,
remain in accord and consistent with the San Rafael General Plan 2020, the objectives of the
Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the Planned Development District in that:
1) The addition of an indoor and outdoor recreational facility to this site has been found
consistent with the types of uses allowed by the Airport/Recreation General Plan land use
designation assigned to this site.
2) The project and the use has been found to be consistent with the General Plan 2020, as
identified in the General Plan consistency table Exhibit 4a of the December 3, 2012 staff
report to the City Council prepared for the project and also detailed in the previously adopted
Environmental and Design Review Permit No. ED05-15 Finding A.
3) The new indoor recreational facility use, in conjunction with the existing airport and limited
light -industrial structures on site, would total a 0.06 floor area ratio (FAR) and falls well
within the permitted FAR limits of the San Rafael General Plan 2020 for the North San
Rafael area.
4) The Planned Development District regulations, as amended under the PD Ordinance 1909
adopted for the property on January 7, 2013, permits a recreational use and development
intensity consistent with the goals and policies of the San Rafael General Plan 2020, as
detailed in the General Plan consistency table and previous reports and resolutions adopted
2
Exhibit 1
for this project by the City Council on December 17, 2012 and January 7, 2013, referenced
herein and in the recent January 21, 2104 staff report to the City Council.
B. The proposed indoor and outdoor recreational use, together with the conditions applicable
thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to
properties or improvement in the vicinity, or to the general welfare of the City in that:
1) The Final Environmental Impact Report has been certified for the project on December 17,
2012 by City Council Resolution 13477 pursuant with the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
2) Findings of fact and a mitigation monitoring and reporting program have been adopted for the
project on December 17, 2012 by City Council Resolution 13478 which cover the proposed
minor project revisions to use hours and building safety enhancements.
3) The project was reviewed by appropriate City Departments and other permitting agencies
resulting in conditions of approval which have been included and made a part of the project,
thus assuring compliance with all applicable standards and requirements of the other
permitting agencies so as to avoid any potential detriment to the public health, safety or
welfare.
4) The type and intensity of the use has been determined to complement and be similar to the
adjacent public recreational uses.
5) The structure has been reviewed for compliance with airport safety regulations and found to
be acceptable in its siting and location near the existing private airport.
6) No additional environmental review under CEQA is required to extend the evening hours of
operation for the indoor facilities as the FEIR supporting the project accounted for the
proposed evening hours of operation when analyzing noise, lighting and other potential
environmental impacts and there has been no change in circumstances or other triggering
event under Public Resources Code section 21166 which would warrant supplemental
environmental review.
7) Accordingly, the proposed Use Permit modification does not trigger the requirement for
supplemental environmental review pursuant to CEQA. The proposed hours of operation
were considered as part of the project's EIR and are consistent with the project's mitigation
measures. Specifically, the proposed Use Permit modification does not result in: (a)
substantial changes in the project which will require major revisions of the environmental
impact report; (b) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the
project is being undertaken which will require major revisions in the FEIR; or (c) new
information, which was not known and could not have been known at the time the
environmental impact report was certified as complete. Public Resources Code section
21166 and CEQA Guidelines section 15162.
C. The proposed indoor and outdoor recreational use has been determined to comply with each of
the applicable provisions of the PD District and other applicable provisions in the Zoning
Ordinance in that the project:
1) Would be consistent with the Planned Development District (PD1909), as revised and
adopted for the site on January 7, 2013.
2) Has been designed to preserve and protect the potential wetlands found on the site and the
project does not propose to fill any of these potential wetlands. Furthermore, the proposed
structures and site improvements would provide a setback exceeding the minimum 50 -foot
setback required by Chapter 13 (Wetland Overlay) of the Zoning Ordinance.
3
Exhibit 1
3) Would provide a building setback and development free buffer from the creek to the north
exceeding the maximum 100 -foot setback required by the Creeks and Other Watercourse
section of Chapter 16 (Site and Use Regulations) of the Zoning Ordinance.
4) Has been evaluated for noise impacts and would not exceed the standards prescribed in the
Noise Standards section of Chapter 16 (Site and Use Regulations) of the Zoning Ordinance.
5) Has been reviewed for conformance with the City's Review Matrix as prescribed by the
Geotechnical Review section of Chapter 16 (Site and Use Regulations) to assess hazards,
determine optimum location for structures, and present any special structural requirements
and been found to be feasible from a geotechnical engineering standpoint with the inclusion
of recommendations, and these design recommendations have been incorporated into the
project through project conditions of approval.
6) Would provide off-street parking in excess of that found to be minimally required for the
recreational use, pursuant to Chapter 18 (Parking) of the Zoning Ordinance, through a
parking analysis prepared for the proposed facility which has been reviewed and accepted as
adequate by the City traffic engineer
7) Parking facilities have been designed to closely meet all parking standards of this chapter,
including landscaping, size and bicycle parking requirements.
8) The proposed modification to hours of operation and incorporation of additional building
safety measures, as proposed as well as required by the terms of the subject Settlement
Agreement affecting the project, would not materially alter the proposed use and
development and remains entirely consistent with the intensity of use and development
anticipated under the adopted PD Ordinance 1909 Zoning.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council approves the
Amendment to the Master Use Permit Conditions of Approval for the San Rafael Airport Recreational
Facility, as follows:
Conditions of Approval - Master Use Permit (UP13-50)
General Conditions ofApproval
1. This Master Use Permit Amendment UP13-50 amen supersedes and replaces Master Use
Permit (UP05-08) as adopted on December 17, 2012, as well as the previous Master Use Permit (UP
99-009), and hereby establishes all conditions for the establishment and ongoing operations of all
uses allowed on the 119.5 -acre property, aka, `the San Rafael Airport site' in accordance with the
Planned Development approval (ZC05-001), the PD Zoning District Standards of the San Rafael
Municipal Code and the recorded Declaration of Restrictions, which limits the land uses allowed on
the property.
2. Conditional uses permitted under this Master Use Permit amendment shall be limited to the Private
Airport and Non -Aviation Uses and Private Recreational Facility Uses as described and conditioned
herein.
3. Any future land use permit requests on the property shall be referred to Marin County Counsel in
order to allow review of the proposal for consistency with the land use deed restriction agreement, of
which the County is a party.
4
Exhibit 1
4. The entire 119.52 -acre airport property on which the recreational facility use is contained shall
continue to be maintained by one owner. No portion of the property may be separately transferred to
separate owners unless applications are filed and approved by the City for a subdivision of the site, in
conformance with the California Subdivision Map Act. Further, any subsequent subdivision of the
property shall include amendments to all applicable land use entitlements, as necessary, to separate
the property into multiple parcels and/or establish any additional land uses on newly created parcels.
5. This Master Use Permit establishes distinctly separate land uses on the property, i.e. Private Airport
Use and Private Recreational Facility Use, which shall be subject to the specific conditions contained
herein. In the event there is a violation of a condition of approval granted for a specific land use, then
only the land use that is in purported violation of its respective condition(s) of the Master Use Permit
shall be subject to review, enforcement and revocation proceedings.
6. This Master Use Permit shall be subject to compliance with the approved PD (ZC05-01) and
conditions of Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED05-15. Any changes shall be subject to
prior review and approval and may require amendments to related zoning entitlements.
7. The property owner(s) shall be responsible for implementing all Mitigation Measures presented in
the San Rafael Airport Recreational Facility Project Final Environmental Impact Report, on file with
the Community Development Department, which are incorporated within the project conditions of
approval. A minimum deposit of $5,000 dollars shall be submitted prior to issuance of permits to
start work. All costs for monitoring compliance with mitigation measures shall be borne by the
applicant.
8. The Airport property owner(s) shall be responsible for ongoing annual repair and maintenance of the
levee system on the subject Airport property and any levee upgrading, as appropriate, based on
anticipated high tide and flood conditions, to maintain an appropriate height. The Airport property
owner shall cooperate with Marin County Department of Public Works and Marin County Flood
Control and Water Conservation District to ensure that all parties work together to assure that
ongoing monitoring and maintenance of the levee system on State tidelands occurs. An annual
maintenance schedule and a report of maintenance work completed shall be provided to the City of
San Rafael Community Development Department.
9. Currently, the levees on the Airport property are maintained by the airport owner at a minimum
consistent elevation of 9 feet MSL (29NGVD datum) to provide adequate protection from
floodwaters. Modifications and upgrades to the property levees shall be subject to prior review and
approval by the City of San Rafael or County of Marin, depending on jurisdiction and as required by
applicable codes.
10. All required local, state and/or federal permits shall be obtained for levee maintenance, repair or
upgrades.
11. This Master Use Permit (UP05-08) amendment to the March 19, 2001 Master Plan for San Rafael
Airport shall be valid for an initial period of four (4) years from date of City Council approval,
during which time the property owner shall have to obtain financing, apply for permits and establish
the additional recreational facility uses approved by this use permit amendment. The approvals
granted for the indoor/outdoor recreational facility use shall be null and void if a building permit is
9
Exhibit 1
not obtained and the recreational facility pursued diligently to completion, occupancy and operation,
or an extension is not granted before the initial period of time provided to establish the use and
exercise the use permit approval.
12. Upon establishment of the indoor/outdoor recreational use within the initial four-year period
provided to inaugurate the use, the Use Permit as amended herein shall become valid and run with
the land and shall not expire unless the use is abandoned. On-going compliance with all conditions
of approval shall be required.
13. If the indoor/outdoor recreational use is not established in compliance with the Master Use Permit
amendment, then the applicable Master Use Permit Conditions (i.e., Conditions 35 through 61) and
the related Environmental and Design Review permit conditions shall become null and void. All
other conditions of approval relating to the site and existing airport use shall remain in full force and
effect for ongoing operations of the private airport use and site.
14. The proposed recreational facility may be constructed in phases. However, occupancy of the building
with a primary sports facility tenant shall occur to inaugurate the use during the initial four-year
period from date of original approval of the recreational facility project, or an extension of time filed
prior to the initial project approval expiration period of December 17, 2016.
Permitted Land Use Conditions — Private Airport and Non Aviation Uses
15. Except as modified herein, the Master Use Permit authorizes continued airport use and operations on
the 119.52 acre site in accordance with the Planned Development approval and associated
Development Plan.
16. The private airport use is limited to 100 -based aircraft.
17. The non -aviation uses are limited to those uses described in Attachment "A" (the airport use
inventory titled, "Existing Permitted Non Aviation Uses at San Rafael Airport," dated February,
2001). There shall be no increase in the amount of square footage dedicated to non -aviation uses as
described in Attachment "A." An Administrative Use Permit shall be required for the following
reasons: when there is a change in non -aviation tenants; or when a tenant changes the nature of their
business (including but not limited to the addition of employees or equipment, modified hours of
operation, or an increase in noise or traffic). As part of the Administrative Use Permit review
process, the City shall analyze the potential for any intensification to the uses, including the addition
of employees, new equipment, modification of hours of operation, and noise associated with the new
business. If deemed necessary by Planning staff, project conditions shall address noise mitigation
measures. In addition, the Administrative Use Permit review process shall also include analysis and
review of traffic impacts associated with any new non -aviation tenant to assure consistency with
applicable City traffic regulations subject to the review and approval of the City Traffic Engineer. At
the discretion of the Community Development Director, a Master Use Permit amendment may be
required.
18. The following airport uses or activities are specifically prohibited:
a. Flight training and the use of the landing strip for practice purposes by flight instructors
b. Helicopters
2
Exhibit 1
c. Charter Flights
d. Uses or activities of a public or semi-public nature, including but not limited to "fly -ins" even
though such use or activity is usually considered accessory to any other use or activity
allowed by this permit and any commercial use, including but not limited to sales or servicing
of airplanes not based at the airport
e. Commercial flight activity or student pilot training
f. Non -based aircraft performing landings or departures
19. The contractors' storage yard uses on the site are limited to the areas ori inall occupied by Linscott
Engineering, Roots Construction, Superior Roofing, Walt Jewell Trucking and Bartlett Tree Experts)
as shown on the approved Development Plan "Master Plan San Rafael Airport" and described in
Attachment "A".
20. Maintenance or servicing of aircraft shall be limited to aircraft based at San Rafael Airport.
21. The non -aviation hours of business are limited to the hours of 7:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M., Monday
through Saturday, excluding holidays. Operation of these businesses, other than routine office work
or other non -noise generating interior work, is not permitted outside the prescribed hours.
22. The airport shall be operated in full conformance with all requirements of the State of California
Department of Transportation, Aeronautics Program, including the state -approved flight path. Any
changes to the flight path shall require an amendment to the Master Use Permit. No airplanes shall
fly over the Santa Venetia and Contempo Marin neighborhoods during takeoff or landing.
23. The applicant (e.g. airport property owner, or operator) shall maintain a list of all based aircraft serial
numbers and shall maintain a video camera on the taxiway to monitor landings and takeoffs on a 24-
hour basis. Flights shall be monitored from the airport business office or other approved location
subject to review and approval of the Community Development Director. The applicant shall
maintain a method to record all flights on video (daytime, nighttime and during inclement weather)
in order to provide the identity of each plane during take -off and landing. Subject to review and
approval of the Planning Division, the applicant shall maintain a method of quickly and easily
retrieving the recorded information when the City or the property owner received complaints about
pilots flying over residential neighborhoods. Videotape archives shall be preserved for a minimum of
60 days. The identity of pilots violating approved flight path shall be provided to the Planning
Division within two workdays following complaint. The airport property owner shall notify all pilots
with based aircraft that pilots violating the flight path restrictions on more than two occasions shall
have their leases terminated within 30 days and shall not be permitted to have their plane based at the
airport. If video monitoring is not effective, other controls can be required by an amendment of the
Master Use Permit.
The property owner shall maintain a record of all flights that do not comply with the conditions of
this master use permit. For example, the record shall include a log of aircraft owner's names and
airplane identification for planes that do not comply with the approved flight path. In addition, the
owner shall also maintain a log of airplane serial numbers for non -based aircraft that illegally lands
at the airport. The log shall be maintained on an on-going basis, and shall be provided to the
Community Development Department on an annual basis as determined by the Community
Development Director.
Exhibit 1
24. The two modular residences shall be used exclusively as on-site residences for the airport security
guard and caretaker. If the units are no longer utilized for the caretaker and security guard, the
residences shall be removed from the site within 120 days of notification by the Community
Development Department, and this requirement shall be documented by the recordation of a deed
restriction prior to issuance of a building permit for the construction of the first residence.
Documentation of employment and residency at the airport for both the caretaker and security guard
shall be provided to the Community Development Director upon demand.
25. All airplane run -ups shall occur at the east end of the runway, or in a designated run-up area in the
vicinity of the intersection of the taxiway and runway. The designated run-up area is subject to the
review and approval of the Community Development Director. Run -ups associated with operations
of a fixed base operator shall only occur inside or in the vicinity of mechanical hangars during the
hours of 8 A.M. and 6 P.M.
26. The airport runway shall be identified with a symbol to indicate to non -based airborne pilots that the
airport is private. The identification shall be consistent with the requirements of the State of
California Division of Aeronautics and shall be maintained on a permanent basis.
Permitted Land Use Conditions —Access, Maintenance and Passive Uses
27. The bridge crossing providing access to the San Rafael Airport Recreation Facility site at the North
Fork of Gallinas Creek shall be replaced with a new 25 -foot wide two-lane bridge deck span, subject
to the following additional requirements:
a. The bridge replacement work shall occur prior to or concurrent with request for and issuance
of building permits for construction of the recreational building, as allowed under the
approved Development Plan and Master Use Permit.
b. The bridge replacement work shall be completed prior to grant of occupancy for any portion
of the new recreational facility building.
c. The bridge replacement shall not occur in the same year as the SMART Rail bridge project in
order to avoid potential overlap of construction work.
28. Areas designated as protected "conservation" areas shall be maintained as passive open space areas;
with the exception that vegetation management and levee maintenance practices are allowed to
continue within these areas.
29. Grazing of the site with animals may be continued for vegetation management within undeveloped
areas (e.g., along interior slopes of levees, within conservation areas and areas not designated for use
by the Development Plan) in order to reduce the need for discing and mowing conducted for wildlife
management as part of the airport safety management practices. This activity shall be subject to the
following restrictions:
a. Fencing for grazing purposes shall be installed and maintained to provide necessary
protection adjacent to habitat on the levees and in tidal marshes.
b. The type of fencing should be suitable for the type of livestock used for grazing. The location
and design of fencing shall be determined by a qualified biologist and based on the wetland
boundaries with ample setback for wetland protection.
s
Exhibit 1
c. The location and design of fencing installed for grazing areas shall be subject to final review
and approval by the Community Development Director.
d. Fencing shall be installed prior to animals being transferred to the site, and shall be
maintained in good repair and condition.
30. Commercial storage in containers and uncovered storage of vehicles, boats and miscellaneous
materials are specifically prohibited (excluding construction -related equipment and supplies stored
within a permitted contractor's storage yard, as determined by the Community Development
Director).
31. Maintenance of existing levees on the property shall continue to be the responsibility of the property
owner(s); i.e., to maintain levees at minimum +9 feet elevation above mean sea level to provide
sufficient freeboard and protection from flood waters. The owner shall be responsible for advising
the City Building and Public Works division when maintenance activities are scheduled and for
ensuring that grading permits for levee work are obtained when required pursuant to applicable codes
enforced by the Building and/or Public Works divisions.
32. On or before July 1 of each year, the property owner shall provide the Community Development
Department and Public Works Department a schedule of completed and planned maintenance
activities, and indicate whether work identified based on preliminary inspections of the levee is
anticipated to trigger a grading permit. Typically, cumulative grading in excess of 50 cubic yards of
material would require a grading permit.
33. The property owner shall be responsible for obtaining a licensing agreement with SMART for the
existing access that crosses the rail track.
34. The applicant shall install all safety measures required by FRA, and CPUC necessary to maintain this
crossing. This shall include, but not be limited to, lights, crossing arms, and other safety equipment.
The new equipment installed shall be Quiet Zone ready in case the City Council decides to include
this portion of the track in a quiet zone.
Permitted Land Use Conditions — Indoor & Outdoor Recreational Facility
35. The recreational facility use shall permit indoor and outdoor recreational uses on that portion of the
site located between the runway and North Fork of Gallinas Creek, east of the airport use support
facilities. The recreational use project area shall include approximately 16 -acres of the entire airport
property (which includes designated "conservation area" containing wetlands, creek and wetland
setback buffers, and a portion of the levee system that surrounds the site) as indicted on the approved
project plans; described further under Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED05-15)
Condition No. 1.
36. Indoor uses consist of an 85,700 moss square foot indoor multi -use recreational facility building for
recreational uses. The mix of recreational facility uses shall be subject to review and approval by the
Community Development Department and City Traffic Engineer prior to issuance of building
permits or occupancy permits in order to ensure that the maximum traffic and parking capacities
specified in these conditions of approval shall not be exceeded. The building may include the
following components:
9
Exhibit 1
a. Multi-purpose indoor sports area for recreational activities; e.g., two (2) indoor sports fields
and similar activities.
b. Gymnasium area(s) for multi -use recreational activities; e.g., baseball, basketball, lacrosse,
dance, gymnastics and similar recreational activities.
c. Ancillary support uses operated concurrently with the indoor recreational uses, which
includes a 14,400 square foot mezzanine level with administrative offices, meeting room,
pro-shop/retail sales, arcade and a cafe/dining area with ancillary sale of alcoholic beverages
for on-site consumption with food service.
37. Permitted outdoor recreational uses are limited to one (1) lighted, all-weather surface outdoor sports
field (e.g., 250' by 350' soccer field) and one (1) un -lighted warm-up area adjacent for use by teams
prior to games on the outdoor sports field. Outdoor fields shall be fenced to provide restricted access
which shall be controlled through the main building, to assure occupancy limits are not exceeded.
38. Indoor Use Hours: The hours of operation for indoor recreational uses and ancillary uses shall be as
follows:
a. 9:00 A.M. to 10:30 P.M., Sunday to Thursday and Federally designated holidays (weekdays).
b. 9:00 A.M. to 11:00 P.M., Friday and Saturday (weekends).
c. Saturday and Sunday hours of operation can start at 8:00 A.M. during the winter season
(November 1 to May 15)
One (1) year following occupancy and full operation of the indoor facility, the applicant may submit
a request to allow the indoor use to remain open until 11:00 PM on weekdays and 12:00 AM on
weekends. Prior to submitting such a request the applicant shall pay the cost for the City of San
Rafael to select and hire a qualified noise consultant to measure intermittent and constant noise
levels generated while the indoor facility is operating. The noise measurements shall be taken
between 9:30 PM and 11:00 PM (nighttime) on at least three weekday evenings and two weekend
evenings during peak season operations. Noise measurements shall be documented near the bridge
crossing over North Gallinas Creek and adjacent to the contiguous Contempo Marin and Captains
Cove residential neighborhoods to demonstrate if the nighttime noise levels experienced at the
nearest residential property boundaries (while the indoor facility is operating) are in compliance with
the following City of San Rafael Municipal Code Table 8.13-1 — General Noise Limits:
50 dBA Intermittent
40 dBA Constant
Upon submittal of a request for extension and completion of the required noise analysis, the City
Council shall hold a noticed public hearing on the request. The decision should be largely based
upon, but not limited to, the following
1) The extent to which the recreational facilily is operating within the City of San Rafael
Municipal Code General Noise Limits.
2) The extent to which intermittent or unusual loud noises have been documented as a result of
the facility activities, e.g., loud car radios, excessive vehicle speeds, groups of people
gathering in the parking lot or using the access roadway/pedestrian pathways at night, or
noise from inside the building extending outdoors, etc.
10
Exhibit 1
3) Testimony received from adjacent residents in Captains Cove and Contempo Marin that
would be most affected by theproject nighttime noise.
4) Any efforts that have been and/or could be made b the operator to mitigate any documented
nuisance noise impacts.
The decision of the City Council shall be made by adoption of a resolution, and may be subject to
additional restrictions, limitations or conditions related to any permitted extension of the facility
operating hours. The cost of processing the request for extension of hours shall be paid by the
applicant.
39. Outdoor Use Hours: The hours of operation for the outdoor sports and warm-up fields shall be as
follows:
a. 9:00 A.M. to 9:00 P.M., daily seven days a week
designa4led holidays (weekdays).
b. 9:00 A.M. r 10:00 P.M., F--ida , and Saturday (weekends).
E Saturday and Sunday hours of operation can start at 8:00 A.M. during the winter season
(November 1 to May 15)
IN WWW 19011
- •
Exhibit 1
Artificial lighting shall be turned off no later than 9:00 P.M. every day of the year and shall not be
turned on again before 8:00 A.M. of the following day. Use of the outdoor fields shall cease no later
than 9:00 P.M. No other artificial lighting shall be used on the outdoor playing fields after 9:00 P.M.
or before 8:00 A.M. The Airport will ensure that any contract for operation of the Sports Facility by
third party will include this limitation on use of the outdoor fields and an third hird party operator must
agree to be bound b the terms of this Condition.
40. All recreational activities and ancillary uses shall end by the designated hours of operation and all
patrons shall be directed to leave the facility by the designated allowable hours of operation (e.g.
event curfew) and/or premises parking areas promptly after close of facility. Congregating in parking
areas shall be discouraged during non -business hours. Maintenance and cleaning crews, employees
and security personnel may be allowed to conduct their routine tasks and shall enter the site no
earlier than one hour before the beginning and leave no later than one hour past the allowable hours
of operation.
41. Use of the indoor and outdoor sports fields may include sports leagues and games (such as soccer,
lacrosse, flag football or similar multi -use sports uses and activities), individual and group training,
and drop-in games, as determined appropriate by the Community Development Department and City
Traffic Engineer.
42. No noise amplification devices including indoor or outdoor speaker systems, loudspeakers or
bullhorns shall be allowed as this would create potential nuisance noise impacts on nearby residents.
43. No fixed or temporary bleachers for spectator seating shall be permitted in conjunction with use of
the outdoor recreational fields.
44. The indoor meeting facility/room may be used for team and birthday parties, staff meetings, meetings
of soccer or sports organizations and referees, community groups, and other similar uses.
45. No sale or consumption of alcoholic beverages or food vendors are permitted to operate outside of
the recreational facility building.
46. Any proposed change in the hours of operation (to operate during the AM peak) and/or intensity of
usage (e.g., to more intense sports field or other recreational activities not deemed by staff as
comparable to proposed and anticipated recreational uses) shall require an amendment to the Master
Use Permit.
47. Any changes to the components of the use involving a substantial remodel that would intensify uses
shall be subject to prior review and approval by the Planning Division and Department of Public
Works to determine whether the changes would result in an intensification of parking requirements
or traffic impacts. A traffic study and minor or major use permit amendment may be required to
address any impacts from a change in any recreational -use tenant occupancy.
48. Parking shall be provided in compliance with adopted PD zoning standards to meet the demand of
the use and requirements of the City parking ordinance, Chapter 14.18. The project proposes 184
paved parking spaces and 86 overflow spaces for the multi -use recreational building. Final parking
calculations shall be provided with plans submitted for building permit and/or final design review.
12
Exhibit 1
49. Any competitive tournament events held on the site shall not be planned that would cause the on-site
parking demand or maximum occupancy limits established for the recreational facility use to be
exceeded. Any special events that would generate off-site or remote parking demands shall require
the prior review and approval of the Planning Division and Public Works Departments.
50. Alcoholic beer and wine beverage service and consumption shall only be allowed as an ancillary
incidental use to the cafe/dining area food service use, as further regulated by the California
Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. The applicant shall maintain suitable kitchen facilities,
and alcoholic beverages may only be served when food service is provided. It is intended that food
and beverage service be contained within building areas designated for "cafe and viewing area,"
"field viewing area" and "meeting room".
51. The facility and site shall be maintained in good repair and condition and free of trash, litter and
debris. Trash and recycling canisters shall be provided on and around the recreational building and
outdoor fields and be regularly maintained. Regular trash and garbage cleanup should be conducted
on and around the building, and outdoor areas. The property owner shall institute a regular trash pick-
up program to clean up trash on the site and dispose of it in appropriate trash and recycling
receptacles.
52. The private roadway extension from the airport access and leading to the recreational facility shall be
gated to prevent access after the allowable hours of operation. The gate shall remain closed outside
of the allowable hours of operation.
53. Prior to occupancy of the building, the applicant and all operator(s) of the recreational facility shall
establish a "code of conduct" plan for review and approval of the Police Department and Community
Development.Director.
a. This code of conduct shall be distributed and required to be signed by all users of the facility.
The owner/operators shall submit evidence of compliance with this requirement to the
Community Development Department and City Officials upon request. (Note: "Users of the
facility" is intended to apply to active participants and not its attendance by visitors,
spectators or parents).
b. Repeated violation of the "code of conduct" shall require that the operators(s) remove and
revoke the patron's use of the facility.
c. The code of conduct shall address the following:
i. Prohibit rowdy and/or noisy behavior
ii. Prohibit screeching of tires, "blasting" music from vehicles or honking of horns
(except for emergency purposes) in the parking lot or along the entire length of the
private driveway leading to the recreational facility
iii. Maintain posted speed limits along airport roadway
iv. Prohibit loitering in or around the building, parking areas, outdoor fields, and
entire length of the airport roadway. No loitering shall occur in the parking lot or
outside the building
v. Prohibit consumption of alcohol outside of the designated areas within the
building
vi. Prohibit public intoxication
13
Exhibit 1
54. The operator shall regularly patrol the site between 9P.M. and closing, 7 days per week. Personnel
shall be made aware of the code of conduct and the conditions of approval and shall enforce them.
a. Prior to the occupancy of the building, the applicant shall submit a plan for security patrol for
review and approval of the Police Department and Planning Division.
b. This requirement for security patrol may be suspended after two years of full operation with
the recommendation of the Police Department, that there have been no significant amount of
criminal or security issues.
c. If this requirement for a security patrol is suspended, it may be reinstated anytime at the
recommendation of the Police Department.
55. Prior to occupancy of the recreational facility, two signs shall be installed, one before the northern
approach to the bridge and one at the western end of the parking lot to inform patrons of the
applicable portions of the "code of conduct" relating to good neighbor practices.
a. The design, placement and content of signs shall be subject to review and approval of the
Planning Division. Once installed, the signs shall be maintained in a good and legible
condition at all times.
b. Required signs shall address the following items:
i. Obey posted speed limits
ii. Respect the neighbors - No loud noise, music, honking while driving into or out
of the site
iii. No loitering
iv. No public intoxication
v. Abide by code of conduct
vi. Abide by on-site parking restrictions
vii. Driveway must be kept clear of vehicles at all times for emergency ingress and
egress — No standing and stopping allowed.
56. Prior to occupancy of the facility, the property owner shall offer to construct a four -foot minimum
solid wall, fence or hedge or combination thereof along the edge of the private access road that runs
along the street edge (adjacent to the grassy area) to minimize headlight glare from vehicle
headlights shining into windows of residences at Captains Cove. The screen shall extend from the
furthest point of the border with Captains Cove property and across the bridge crossing. If
installation of the fence screen is accepted by Captains Cove along the access road boundary, it shall
be installed prior to grant of occupancy allowing operation of the recreational facility. Design and
final placement of fence shall be subject to review and approval by the Community Development
Director. If the screen wall, fence or hedge is not accepted by Captains Cove, it shall not be required.
The Airport property owner shall be responsible for the maintenance of the solid wall/fence or hedge
or combination thereof in perpetuity or until the recreational use ceases. Further, landscape
enhancement along the existing access road easement shall be subject to final review and approval
by the Planning Division.
57. Mitigation measure MM Hyd-1f (Maintenance of Paved Areas) shall be implemented for the
duration of the use. The recreational facility parking lots and other common paved areas shall be
properly maintained by sweeping or other appropriate means, to prevent the majority of litter from
washing into storm drains. Parking lots and paved areas shall be swept once per week. Should the
Project Applicant or successor fail to maintain this schedule, the City shall sweep the parking lots
14
Exhibit 1
and paved areas at the expense of the Project Applicant or successor, and included in CC&R's
recorded for the property.
58. Exterior lighting at the recreational facility use shall be designed and maintained to implement
mitigation measures MM Bio -2e (Event Curfew), MM Bio -3a (Nocturnal Lighting), MM Bio -3b
(Lighting Curfew), and MM Aesth-la as outlined in the MMRP incorporated by reference herein,
and included under Environmental and Design Review Permit No. ED05-15 conditions of approval.
This includes the following lighting limitations related to use of the facility:
a. Exterior lighting provided on a master photoelectric cell;
b. Provisions of sufficient security level lighting;
c. Outdoor field lighting shall be set to turn off 15 minutes after the last game; 9:00 P.M. at the
latest on weekdays and City holidays and 10:00 P.M. at the latest on weekends (if extended
hours on weekends are authorized pursuant to Condition 37);
d. Security level lighting shall be set to turn off in parking areas and pedestrian walkways one-
half hour after close of the facility, e.g. by 12:30 A.M.
e. Lighting of the outdoor soccer field designed to have focused illumination that will ensure no
direct lighting of off-site areas, such as the North Fork of Gallinas Creek.
f. Lighting fixtures on the perimeter of the Project shall be outfitted with hoods and cut-off
lenses so that the light source itself is not visible to the naked eye from neighboring
properties, thereby avoiding indirect light "trespassing" into adjacent habitat areas.
g. The recreational facility shall set a 10:00 P.M. outdoor event lighting restriction (e.g. event
curfew) by which time all outdoor field lighting shall be turned off. This curfew shall be
earlier on weekdays, by 9:00 P.M. unless a noise study is prepared that determines outdoor
field use would not violate the City noise ordinance, pursuant to Use Permit Condition 37; in
which case lighting shall be turned off by 10:00 P.M. at the latest. While safety lighting
allowing visitors to safely leave the site may be illuminated as late as 12:30 A.M., all outdoor
field lighting shall be terminated no later than 10:00 P.M. When there are evening outdoor
soccer events, the maximum 10:00 P.M. end time will ensure that light generated from the
use of the recreational facility's outdoor fields will not disrupt nocturnal wildlife species'
activity patterns, allowing nocturnal migration movements through the project area after that
time. If no games are scheduled, the lighting shall be turned off.
59. Incidental site lighting in the parking areas and around the buildings is allowed in order to foster a
safe environment, but not to allow activity on the outdoor fields past permitted hours of operation.
60. The building and site design shall implement the requirements of MM Haz-1 (Risk Reduction
Design Features), MM Haz-2 (Elimination of Flight Hazards), MM Hyd-2 Flood proofing as
outlined in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP), and included in the ED05-15
conditions of approval. This shall include enhanced fire sprinkler and exiting building safety
features, design of all site improvements including parking areas, drive aisles, vegetation and
structures to avoid intersection of the 7:1 `ascending clear zone', installation of safety lighting at
specific locations on the site building, fencing and light standard, and building dry floodproofing to
+7 NGVD elevation in conformance with FEMA -standards, signage identifying maximum
occupancy limits for the outdoor soccer and warmup field areas, and prohibiting access outside of
fenced areas except by facility personnel.
15
Exhibit 1
61. The parking row along the south boundary fence line that borders the airport runway shall be
removed, modified or relocated in accordance with federal and state requirements so that no
penetration into the ascending clear zone would result; e.g., maintaining a minimum clearance of 10'
above parking areas and driveways.
62. The occupancy limit for the Indoor Facility shall not exceed 345 people at any time. Further, the
project shall implement the following measures from the list of Optional Building Design Measures
from the May 16, 2012 Mead & Hunt letter, expanding the list of measures required by MM Haz-2:
Elimination of Flight Hazards (superseding ED 05-15 condition 68). The Project Applicant shall
demonstrate compliance with the following on detailed construction plans:
a. Limit height of proposed structures to assure clearance of the 7:1 Transitional Surface (aka,
`ascending clear zone')
b. Redesign, modify or relocate the row of parking stalls nearest to the airfield in accordance
with federal and state requirements so that no penetration into the ascending clear zone would
result; e.g., maintaining a minimum clearance of 10' above parking areas and drivewq
c. Add obstruction lights to the following features to make them more conspicuous to pilots:
i. Southwesterly and southeasterly corners of building
ii. Southwesterly and southeasterly ends of the fence fronting the airfield
iii. Most easterly field light along the southeastern edge of the outdoor soccer field
d. Tall trees shall be trimmed and maintained to ensure that they do not constitute an airspace
obstruction (or, alternatively, shorter species can be planted).
e. Outdoor parkin lot lights and outdoor soccer field lights, in particular, shall be shielded so
that they do not aim above the horizon. Additionally, outdoor lights should be flight checked
at night to ensure that they do not create glare duringlandings andings and takeoffs.
f. Construction cranes and other tall construction equipment shall be lowered at the end of each
day.
g. Incorporate the two mitigation measures for enhanced exiting and fire sprinkler systems (as
currently required in the FEIR).
h. Limit and post maximum occupancy signage for the indoor facility- not to exceed 345 people
inside the building at any time (note: this occupancy level accommodates the maximum
occupancy level of 345 people anticipated to be inside the recreational building during peak
usage).
i. Post maximum occupancy signage at 336 people for the outdoor soccer field area (note: this
occupancylevel accommodates the maximum occupancy anticipated for the soccer field and
is set at the low end of the 2011 Handbook's acceptable intensity range).
[®
Exhibit 1
Post maximum occupant signage for 104 people in the outdoor warm-up area (note: this
occupancy level exceeds the range anticipated for use of the warm-up field and is set at the
low end of the 2011 Handbook's acceptable intensity range).
k. Post clearly marked exit gates and fencing around the outdoor field areas to further enhance
safety in outdoor field areas.
1. Install and maintain fencing (chain link or equivalent) between the recreation and airport
facilities to prevent trespass by children onto the airfield and protect the site from any
potential accident from planes that could veer off the runway; with a barrier that complies
with FAA Advisory Circular 150/5370-10B, Standards for Specifying Construction of
Airports, Item F-162, Chain Link Fences.
m. Prohibit installation of fixed -seating, including temporary bleachers, around the outdoor field
areas to avoid creating confined spaces and higher than anticipated per -acre intensity
occupancy levels.
n. Prohibit conduct of any special events that would draw a large number of people to the site
that would exceed the above -noted occupancy limits established for the recreation facility
use.
o. Eliminate building skylights.
p. Upgrade roof strength by installing standing seam structural roof panels supported by hot
formed I beam main structural columns and beams.
g. Build concrete walls on the first floor to a minimum height of 8 feet NGVDD.
r. Provide fencing between the parking lot and outdoor fields in order to control occupancy
levels on outdoor fields. Include at least four (4) clearly marked exita� tes.
s. Prohibit airport access gates in fencing separating the Sports Facility- from the airfield.
Separation fencing shall be of sufficient height and design to prevent children from accessing the
airfield."
Exhibit 1
I, ESTHER C. BEIRNE, 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 Council of said City on the 3rd
day of February, 2014, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Councilmembers:
NOES: Councilmember:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
ESTHER C. BEIRNE, City Clerk
Attachment A — Existing Permitted Non -aviation Uses at San Rafael Airport
M
Exhibit 1
Attachment A
Existing Permitted Non -aviation Uses at San Rafael Airport (Subject to updates)*
Key
Tenant
of Use
Description
Employees
*U date/Notes
_Type
Office, storage of
1
inscott
Contractor
equipment, materials
20
Engineering
and supplies, repair of
equipment and vehicles.
Warehouse w/small
Building formerly occupied by
2
Steve Cosey
Auto Repair
office Outside storage
3
Underground Construction
fenced yard approx. 900 sf
3
Pat Phillips
oat repair
Shop
3
and storage
Bartlett Tree
Relocated next to Linscott's yard
4
Experts Remote
Contractor
Outside storage
0
approx. 3500sf. Formerly Roots
Yard
yard
Livestock, hay and
5
Grazing
grain storage structures,
0
&H will reintroduce in future.
Management
an
fences, staging areas
6
Lulu Metal
Metal
Sculpture
Workshop. Storage of
1
Formerly Community
Artist
materials
Playgrounds.
Small office, shop and
Formerly occupied by Caron
Superior
fenced storage of
plumbing. Storage yard Formerly
Roofing
Contractor
roofing supplies and
4
used by Lyle Reed Striping and
equipment.
Newton trucking. Yard shape
adjusted.
8
demolished
Warehouse
Shop and storage within
2Demolished
as part of current
building.
Master Plan (99) improvements.
9
Tom Muirhead
Warehouse
Cabinet shop and
1
Replaced Bartlett Tree Experts
storage within building
10
Vacant
Office
Contractor's office.
2
Formerly Rich Nave Building
Contractor office.
11
alt Jewell
ruck storage
1
Trucking
Containers
As permitted under condition #8
12
southwest of
Misc. Storage
8' X 20' sea containers
0
of previous use permit Under
inscottPew
plan these are eliminated.
Bartlett Tree
Office shop and fenced
Building and fenced yard
13
Experts
Contractor
storage yard.
14 Previously occupied by Bauman
then Four Seasons.
19
Exhibit 1
[This page intentionally blank]
20
0
LEONARD A. RIFKIND
THOMAS C. TAYLOR, JR.*
*OF COUNSEL
January 30, 2014
LAW OFFICES
RIFKIND LAW GROUP
100 DRAKE'S LANDING ROAD, SUITE 260
GREENBRAE, CALIFORNIA 94904
TEL (41 5) 785-7988 . Fax (41 S) 7B5-7976
WWW. RIFKIN DLAWGROUP.COM
VIA EMAIL ONLY: Kraig.Tambornin ciiyofsanrafael.org;
Esther.Beirnefa,cityofsanrafael.or; Raffi.Boloyan(�icityofsanrafael.or ;
Paul.Jensengeityofsanrafael. org
REAL ESTATE
LAND USE
BUSINESS LAW
ESTATE PLANNING
Mayor Gary Phillips
Members of the San Rafael City Council
1400 Fifth Avenue
San Rafael, CA 94901
Re: Project: 397-400 Smith Ranch Road (San Rafael Airport Recreational Facility
Project Amendment)
Request: For Amendment to Master Use Permit (UP05-08) To Modify Hours of
Operation, File No. UPI 3-050.
Hearing Date and Time: February 4, 2014, 7:00 p.m.
Dear Mayor Phillips and Members of the San Rafael City Council:
As you know, our law firm represents Captain's Cove Property Owners Association
("Association"). The Association thanks the Council's careful consideration of the
request by the applicant to modify the permitted hours of operation, and its anticipated
decision not to change the permitted hours for interior operations as set forth in Condition
No. 3 8 of the Master Use Permit ("MUP").
Condition No. 38. Comments. While the Association appreciates the Council's efforts
to mitigate the Project's impacts to Association residents and all residents in the Smith
Ranch Road neighborhood, determination of whether significant impacts exist should not
be limited to a noise study and the Association urges the Council to consider any and all
significant complaints received by the City when reviewing the use permit hours of
operation after a year of operation. Certainly impacts can include other impacts as well,
e.g. crime, litter, loitering, trespassing, etc.
Condition of Approval No. 56 is Inadequate and Needs to be Revised; Request For
Public Hearing. The Association respectfully requests that the Council schedule a
noticed public hearing to reconsider Condition No. 56, relating to mitigation of impacts
that the Project will have on Association residents that is wholly inadequate.
Mayor Gary Phillips
� Members of the San Rafael City Council
January 30, 2014
Page 2 of 3
Generally, Conditions of Approval Nos. 53-56, inclusive, relate to efforts to mitigate
impacts on Association residents and Contempo Marin residents, as well as other
neighboring communities along Smith Ranch Road. Specifically, the Association
respectfully requests that the City Council consider revising and augmenting Condition
No. 56, relating to mitigation conditions to protect the Association. Given the volume of
traffic identified in the EIR, up to 1700 trips per day, Condition No. 56, as currently
stated, limited to a four -foot solid wall, is wholly inadequate and requires additional
mitigation measures. The Association requests that the Project developer be required to
retain for the Association to consult with a sound engineer, landscape architect and
arborist to create improvements as the applicant's cost that will mitigate the true impacts
of this Project.
New Information Exists Requiring Further Environmental Review For the Next
Discretionary Approval Sought by the Project Applicant. New information that has
arisen since the Council's December 2012 certification of the Final Environmental
Impact Report (FEIR) in the form a state-wide drought. The Governor of the State of
California declared a drought emergency state wide in January 2104. Also in January,
Marin Municipal Water District passed a resolution imposing a 25 percent voluntary
reduction in water use, with consideration of making the reduction mandatory in April
2014, depending on reservoir levels at that time. A Local & Rekional Monitor v. City of
Los Angeles (App. 2 Dist. 1993) 12 Ca1.App.4th 1773, rehearing denied; 14 CCR § 15162
Accordingly, any subsequent discretionary approval by the City requires additional
environmental review. See CEQA Guideline Section 15162, subd. (c).
Here, the applicant seeks modification of its use permit to increase hours of operation,
which by definition is discretionary and logically would have environmental impact.
Since it appears at this time no increase in hours will be permitted, no further
environmental review is necessary at this time. The Association, however, will be
vigilant in its monitoring of the Project and its operations should any future requests for
discretionary review by the applicant arise.
Mayor Gary Phillips
,t Members of the San Rafael City Council
January 30, 2014
Page 3 of 3
Conclusion.
The application to amend and increase the hours of operation as provided in Condition of
Approval No. 38 should be denied. Condition of Approval No. 56 merits further Council
review at a future public hearing. Any future discretionary review of this project, given
the drought, is subject to further environmental review.
Very truly yours,
RIFKIN4AW GROUP
Leonard A. Ri ind
LAR/fw � � tk�
cc: clients —. ``-�
bruntry 30. 2014
LAW cwr�v
RIFKIND LAW GROUP
MD DQWXO LMMIK N==. QxM 26(j
Nnq,rC"A"W". 9=04
, P.b. N C,L A',"xP0 tj I',
L,\ ENIAR, ONLA': Kraig,' Uiphyan jail"; go thapryf, Amy
Avrjknk�; 'W'd- oVAQ! tMi : v:0 0 HAO% All
.tt the '�Un Rafael City Council
3954M) SnX DIA, NO (401 IRAQI PdrINII
Opera i i �; i i, 1 i c
Heariiq,Date ,ii d Iiine., February 4,2014,7:00 p.i .
it, ais 111611ilis and Nlk wiK° rs of the Sat.i Cily cotincil:
PR At Lsmar
EnaM
(-:xsS0CA,q0 1f._ .1 -"Wmv! Min it: ( 051cw, 0X. 40 ow1kno"a 'dwic
request by ikw,yQ in; w nond K -m, oknkn I nw- .0 V MI&QUnd
dcAska asa 0, Vw. on: Iwasawd how. vu kk A 1 qwu ULM A 1 Ah in 1 mwluotl
No- 38ofi., c-!,
OWhOn A". 18. ( oninicnis. Mile to Ayoidikd, jjv,, Law- :& 1 ouncil's cbqw.
to mulTaw uw NquCs hymis to Nsociation rcsid—,,i <,& all residents in Tv VHQ
lZanch AN wJibodupY. TieniSmAm of 'i, i".ii1cant inll%lets Ii,,,,;Id i.
be knited to A wise stod, ail_: 'he ANstwMi UTCS TL COMM to consiTr ny. uni A
COhif)kiinls fe,�eii hy the (in "Sn rede"ing the use penQ Wws w
operation T&tera year oropena, I Certainly impacts can iii,: to odwr Anpcts as well.
e.g. crime, litter, loitering, tresl ,An g,cit c.
(Vndkkn of Appro% al \o. 56 i% Inwhol"itv and Nurd, to Iw vi & vd: mjp"-I pir
1MIN Iluaring. I lie Asywiantmi mpccuu, requems non inn cknawk >L"waule a
w twAring to rccon:,id�.r Condition No. 56, rdating to mitiption ofimpacts
that the will have on Associatki w.dents that is AtTy KnAcquace.
Mayor Gary Phillips
Members of the San Rafael City Council
January 30, 2014
Page 2 of 3
Generally, Conditions of Approval Nos. 53-56, inclusive, relate to efforts to mitigate
impacts on Association residents and Contempo Marin residents, as well as other
neighboring communities along Smith Ranch Road. Specifically, the Association
respectfully requests that the City Council consider revising and augmenting Condition
No. 56, relating to mitigation conditions to protect the Association. Given the volume of
traffic identified in the EIR, up to 1700 trips per day, Condition No. 56, as currently
stated, limited to a four -foot solid wall, is wholly inadequate and requires additional
mitigation measures. The Association requests that the Project developer be required to
retain for the Association to consult with a sound engineer, landscape architect and
arborist to create improvements as the applicant's cost that will mitigate the true impacts
of this Project.
New Information Exists Requiring Further Environmental Review For the Nert
Discretionary Approval Sought by the Project Applicant. New information that has
arisen since the Council's December 2012 certification of the Final Environmental
Impact Report (FEIR) in the form a state-wide drought. The Governor of the State of
California declared a drought emergency state wide in January 2104. Also in January,
Marin iviunicipal Nater District passed a resolution imposing a 25 percent voluntary
reduction in water use, with consideration of making the reduction mandatory in April
2014. depending on reservoir levels at that time. A Local & Regional Afonitor v. City of
Los An elg es (App. 2 Dist. 1993) 12 Cal.App.4th 1773, rehearing denied; 14 CCR §15162
Accordingly, any subsequent discretionary approval by the City requires additional
environmental review. See CEQA Guideline Section 15162, subd. (c).
Here, the applicant seeks modification of its use permit to increase hours of operation,
which by definition is discretionary and logically would have environmental impact.
Since it appears at this time no increase in hours will be permitted, no further
environmental review is necessary at this time. The Association, however, will be
vigilant in its monitoring of the Project and its operations should any future requests for
discretionary review by the applicant arise.
Nkqor (Awl Ildlip",
of the S,111 City Council
Or"a-V X 201-1
NYC i of 3
Conclusion.
Cho ippWation to mend and inanho Te hmvs dAqvru4vn as pprAdW in (AnWiTin `it'
W ion at a Sure p0h, UK, Any it it"_ Wcivlk,mtr? o;'ihii pro�ject, given
the ismightis sid4cal v furthcr cm Knumul roN im,
FII K 1; NNW GROU P
Inomad A. il�iriii'&
L A R; Av
cc: clients
Esther Beirne
From: Robert Herbst <rherbst@jhsproperties.net>
Sent: Friday, January 31, 2014 10:24 AM
To: Kraig Tambornini; Robert F. Epstein; Paul Jensen
Cc: Diane Hanna; Esther Beirne; Nancy Mackle; Raffi Boloyan; Andrew Rowley
Subject: Re: Hearing on Monday
Our preference is to continue this item. I have spoken with Councilman McCullough this morning. He would like to review the draft condition 38
to determine if it accurately reflects the intent of his motion from the last hearing.
From our perspective, we do not object to the proposed noise study. What we object to is the idea that a professional acoustical noise study be
weighted approximately equally with unsubstantiated verbal public testimony. We understand that the public must be allowed to comment
during the review hearing, but in the absence of documented and verified proof of abusive behavior by the sports center, the noise study should
be determinative.
Thanks,
Bob Herbst
On 1/30/14 10:35 AM, "Kraig Tambornini" <Kraig.Tambornini@citvofsanrafael.org> wrote:
All We should go ahead and have the CC continue this item to allow time for us all to review this.
Please advise.
Kraig
From: Robert Herbst [mailto:rherbst@ihsproperties.net]
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2014 10:04 AM
To: Kraig Tambornini
Cc: Diane Hanna
Subject: Hearing on Monday
Importance: High
Kraig,
We are unwilling to agree to condition 38 proposed by staff. We engaged in substantial settlement negotiations with the neighbors, of which the
City was a part. The City was aware of, and allowed the settlement to proceed based partially on a trade-off of outdoor vs. indoor operating
hours. It was explained to us by City staff that for procedural reasons, this hours trade-off had to be heard and approved by the Council at a
subsequent public hearing. Since the City particated and approved the settlement agreement, we believe it was a fair expectation on our part that
the hours trade-off would be officially ratified by the Council at the public hearing.
We therefore continue to believe that the right and fair thing for the Council to do is to ratify ALL of the settlement terms, including the hours
trade-off. Failing that, as we requested at the hearing, at least modify condition 38 to give us an objective, measurable noise standard under
which we can 'earn' the extended indoor hours that we had in good faith negotiated for.
We believe strongly that staff's proposed condition 38 is not fair. It gives equal or nearly equal weighting to "Testimony received from adjacent
neighbors", who need merely show up at the public hearing and continue to make more unsubstantiated claims about diapers, drinking,
trespassing, etc, without any need to show evidence that this behavior actually occurred, or was caused by our sports facility (and not Mclnnnis
Park, which happens to be the source of the neighbors' current complaints).
Meanwhile, Condition 38 requires us to spend $10,000 or more on a professional 3rd party noise study to demonstrate that we are in compliance
with the City noise ordinance. This is not a fair balancing, especially given that we had bargained in good faith for the hours trade-off, with the
City's knowing participation.
If Staff cannot modify their proposed condition 38 prior to the City Council hearing on Monday, then we would prefer to take the item off the
agenda so it can be discussed at more length. Furthermore, as we discussed, the lawsuit and settlement agreement have now taken over one year
away from our approved building timeframe of 4 years. We would like the 4 year schedule re -instated effective on the date of the Council's final
approval of condition 38 and other revised conditions related to the Settlement Agreement.
Please call me to discuss.
Best,
Bob
Esther Beirne
From: Kraig Tambornini
Sent: Monday, February 03, 2014 7:56 AM
To: Robert F. Epstein
Cc: Paul Jensen (Paul.Jensen@cityofsanrafael.org); Raffi Boloyan
(Raffi.Boloyan@cityofsanrafael.org); Esther Beirne
Subject: FW: Condition 38
Attachments: Condition 38 - Redline Airport to Staff (00382445xA4507).docx; Condition 38 - Airport
Version (00382425xA4507).docx
See attached and below. Please advise as to rneetings/timing for discussion of the requested edits. Also, resetting the
expiration period may require re -noticing. KT
From: Robert Herbst[maiIto: rherbstCcbjhsproperties.net]
Sent: Monday, February 03, 2014 7:50 AM
To: Kraig Tambornini
Subject: Fwd: Condition 38
Here you go Kraig. Also we would like the 4 year project completion clock to re -set.
-------- Original message--------
Subject:Fwd: Condition 38
From:Robert Herbst <rherbst(tjhsproperties.net>
To:andrew mccullough@150pelican.eom
Cc:
-------- Original message --------
Subject: Condition 38
From:Diane Hanna <diane!u�SSLLAVN'FIRIVI.COM>
To:Robert Herbst <rherbst;ajhsproperties.net>
Cc:
Attached is my stab at the revised condition 38 and a redline showing the changes from the Staff's version.
SSL FIRM
38. Indoor use Hours: The hours of operation for the indoor recreational uses and ancillary uses shall be
as follows:
a. 9:00 A.M. to 10:30 P.M., Sunday to Thursday and Federally designated holidays (weekdays).
b. 9:00 A.M. to 11:00 P.M., Friday and Saturday (weekends)
c. Saturday and Sunday hours of operation can start at 8:00 A.M. during the winter season
(November 1 to May 15)
One (1)year following occupancy and full operation of the indoor facility, the applicant may submit a
request to allow the indoor use to remain open until 11:00 PM on weekdays and 12:00 AM on
weekends. Prior to submitting such a request the applicant shall pay _the �cost _for the Ch and
Rafael Tto-select and hire a qualified noise consultant approved by_th CAy_to measure intermittent
and constant noise levels generated while the indoor facility is operating. The noise measurements
shall be taken between 9:30 PM and 11:00 PM (nighttime) on at least three weekday evenings and
two weekend evenings during peak season operations. Noise measurements shall be documented
near the bridge crossing over North Gallinas Creek and adjacent to the contiguous Contempo Marin
and Captains Cove residential neighborhoods to demonstrate if the nighttime noise levels
experienced at the nearest residential property boundaries (while the indoor facility is operating) are
in compliance with the following City of San Rafael Municipal Code Table 8.13-1 - General Noise
Limits:
50 5_0-dBA Intermittent
40 dBA Constant
1�pa-sub€itaa- of a reeit fey et�osi ar�def le+i n of +h® r� nuei r}-aral_s+- t#e+t
mora +not I+r ¢t c the fo41gwjaq
-H=� If the noise measurements are consistent with the noise limits set fortis _above. an_d thopity Pias
not received anv si nificant verified _written comPl irts_froM adjacent residents_ the Plannin Division
shall have the authority_ to app oUe th _a piicant retfuest for an extension_ of the -indoor heurs�o
qgeration as set forth above. in the event the Cid has received significant verified written complaints
from adjacent residents._ then the City Council shall hold a_noticeda ll hh_earir�g on_thg g 1icanL,
request_t_o extend the indoor hours ofaporatip __The_City Councils decision should be lately based
ur,,on_the extent to which the recreational facility is operating within the City of San Rafael Municipal
Code General Noise Limits. In addition, the Cgy_Qouncil may consider
24 The extent to which intermittent or unusual loud noises have been documented as a direct
result of the facility activities e.g. loud car radios emanatinq from the ertyr, excessive vehicle
speeds on the access roads, groups of people gathering in the facilites parking lot or using the
access roadway/pedestrian pathways at night, or noise from inside the building extending
outdoors, etc.
'Testimony received from '
3-)',-T�est� :aaGent�--res,dera�s-�-Ga�t�+rrs�-���,;d_.�.�:����r�-_fi����r
woad-be-rnc�st��cted--b� �e_�cz-n+rhte-��ise-
2j 4} -Any efforts that have been and/or could be made by the operator to mitigate any documented
nuisance noise impacts.
The decision of the City Council shall be made by adoption of a resolution, and may be subject to
additional restrictions limitations or conditions related to aa_;,
rt -he -cost f' -'3r e—ass n -zn,& (=u ,cYf i �'?F�r i� ti b�_- .Y� b W ih;e
aF = + r-,, `tonal hours of nigl_T{lr-,le indoor oreration.
The hours of operation specified in a tnntj ., In above may be-eXte rd ed -t$ &00�Ary .-te-44-00--P.M-
Sunday-t� and Federally e-loc nn�+o rJ hnlirl we i�uooLrlovc\ Dort o.nn o nn +„ !-)-nn�_
FFi'F rjG�.p_'�`y a-nd Saturday (weekends) fellewinn the first year r,f establishment Dod nncrotion of the use,
provided that the C`i+v met- received any oinnifinant wrhte r-
38. Indoor use Hours: The hours of operation for the indoor recreational uses and ancillary uses shall be
as follows:
a. 9:00 A.M. to 10:30 P.M., Sunday to Thursday and Federally designated holidays (weekdays).
b. 9:00 A.M. to 11:00 P.M., Friday and Saturday (weekends)
c. Saturday and Sunday hours of operation can start at 8:00 A.M. during the winter season
(November 1 to May 15)
One (1) year following occupancy and full operation of the indoor facility, the applicant may submit a
request to allow the indoor use to remain open until 11:00 PM on weekdays and 12:00 AM on
weekends. Prior to submitting such a request the applicant shall select and hire a qualified noise
consultant approved by the City to measure intermittent and constant noise levels generated while
the indoor facility is operating. The noise measurements shall be taken between 9:30 PM and 11:00
PM (nighttime) on at least three weekday evenings and two weekend evenings during peak season
operations. Noise measurements shall be documented near the bridge crossing over North Gallinas
Creek and adjacent to the contiguous Contempo Marin and Captains Cove residential neighborhoods
to demonstrate if the nighttime noise levels experienced at the nearest residential proper
boundaries (while the indoor facility is operating) are in compliance with the following City of San
Rafael Municipal Code Table 8.13-1 — General Noise Limits:
50 dBA Intermittent
40 dBA Constant
If the noise measurements are consistent with the noise limits set forth above, and the City has not
received any significant verified written complaints from adjacent residents, the Planning Division
shall have the authority to approve the applicant's request for an extension of the indoor hours of
operation as set forth above. In the event the City has received significant verified written complaints
from adjacent residents, then the City Council shall hold a noticed public hearing on the applicant's
request to extend the indoor hours of operation. The City Council's decision should be largely based
upon the extent to which the recreational facility is operating within the City of San Rafael Municipal
Code General Noise Limits. In addition, the City Council may consider
1) The extent to which intermittent or unusual loud noises have been documented as a direct
result of the facility activities, e.g., loud car radios emanating from the property, excessive
vehicle speeds on the access roads, groups of people gathering in the facility's parking lot or
using the access roadway/pedestrian pathways at night, or noise from inside the building
extending outdoors, etc.
2) Any efforts that have been and/or could be made by the operator to mitigate any documented
nuisance noise impacts.
The decision of the City Council shall be made by adoption of a resolution, and may be subject to
additional restrictions, limitations or conditions related to the additional hours of nighttime indoor
operation.
CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
ROUTING SLIP / APPROVAL FORM
SRRA / SRCC AGENDA ITEM NO. 5, a
DATE OF MEETING: February 3, 2014
FROM: Kraig Tamborninj;'Senior Planner
DEPARTMENT: Community Development
DATE: 1/27/14
TITLE OF DOCUMENT: RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AMEMI A
MASTER USE PERMIT (UP13-050) MODIFYING THE HOURS OF OPERATION AND BDING SAFETY
MEASURES FOR THE SAN RAFAEL AIRPORT RECREATIONAL FACILITY PROJECT AT 397-400
SMITH RANCH ROAD
Consent Calendar Item continued from January 21, 2014 meeting.
Department Head (signature)
(LOWER HALF OF FORM FOR APPROVALS ONLY)
APPROVED AS COUNCIL / AGENCY
AGENDA ITEM:
City Manager -(signature)
NOT APPROVED
REMARKS:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney (signature)
SAN RAFAEL AIRPORT RECREATION FACILITY- CITY COUNCIL MEETING
STATEMENT EXPLAINING PROPOSAL TO CONTINUE THE MATTER TO THE FEBRUARY 18 CITY COUNCIL
MEETING
➢ Airport project resolution was scheduled for review this evening; continued from the January 21
City Council meeting
➢ Project applicant has requested a continuance to review the draft condition addressing the
indoor operating hours and the scope of the noise study
➢ Staff concurs with the continuance; will provide an opportunity to consult with a
noise/acoustical engineer on the scope of the required noise study
Action to continue will require a vote of the City Council to continue the matter to the February
18 Council meeting