Resolution of the San Rafaelplanning Commission

Resolution of the San Rafaelplanning Commission

RESOLUTION NO. _____

RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAELPLANNING COMMISSION

APPROVING AN ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT (ED15-082) AND VARIANCE (V16-005)FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF

A NEW CITY OF SAN RAFAEL FIRE STATION 57

AT 3530 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE (PTN. OF MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER CAMPUS)

(PORTION OF APN: 179-270-12)

WHEREAS,in 2013, the San Rafael voters approved Measure E, which established a sales tax to fund long-term improvements to the City’s essential facilities; and

WHEREAS, following the voter-approved Measure E, in 2015, the City Council adopted the San Rafael Essential Facilities Strategic Plan, which presents the City’s road map for the replacement of and improvements to the aging emergency service facilities. Concurrent with this action, the City Council authorized funding for Phase 1 of this plan, which includes the rebuilding of Fire Station 52 and fire training center, the development of a new Public Safety Center in Downtown San Rafael, and the rebuilding of Civic Center Fire Station 57 (subject project); and

WHEREAS, the City hired Mary McGrath Architects and Kitchell to design and oversee development, respectively, of Phase 1 of the strategic plan. Plans for the development of a new, Fire Station 57 were developed to include and house Station Company 57 and Medic 3, which is currently located at Fire Station 53 (Joseph Court). Plan designs were developed with review and input from key Fire Department staff, the City Council Essential Facilities Subcommittee and a working group that included community stakeholders; and

WHEREAS, in January 2016, an Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED15-082) planning application was filed for the redevelopment of the 0.72-acre site (area leased from the County of Marin) with a new, 9,600-square-foot Fire Station 57. The initial project design proposed to fill a 0.09-acre wetland (jurisdictional) to accommodate the needed turning/maneuvering space for large fire apparatus, on-site parking and storage; and

WHEREAS, In April 2016 following consultation with the County of Marin staff, the project site boundaries/lease area and fire station development plans were revised to avoid filling the small jurisdictional wetland. The revised development plans propose a five- to 10-foot setback/bufferbetween the development area and the edge of the wetland; and

WHEREAS, San Rafael General Plan Policy CON-4 (Wetland Setbacks) and the provisions of SRMC Chapter 14.13 (Wetland Overlay District) set forth a minimum, development free setback (buffer) of 50-feet from a delineated wetland. Policy CON-4 allows a waiver from this policy if it can be demonstrated that a reduced setback/buffer provides protection to the function of the wetland to the maximum extent feasible and that the resulting values are to the satisfaction of the City following review by the appropriate regulatory agencies. A Variance application was filed (V16-005) to request the waiver and reduced wetland setback/buffer; and

WHEREAS, consistent with General Plan 2020 Policy CON-4, the revised fire station development plans with the reduced wetland setback/buffer were forwarded to the appropriate regulatory agencies for review and comment (California Regional Water Quality Control Board and California Department of Fish and Wildlife). The City received no response from these agencies regarding the reduced wetland/setback buffer; and

WHEREAS, the Fire Station 57 site is located on the Marin County Civic Center campus, which is owned by the County of Marin. The station site is within the Marin County Civic Center National Register District, a landmarked historic district. For this reason, on January 27, 2016, the project design was referred to and reviewed by the Frank Lloyd Wright Civic Center Conservancy. The Conservancy unanimously supported the project design, as proposed. On May 24, 2016, the Marin County Board of Supervisors conducted a public workshop on and provided a favorable review of the revised development plans for the fire station; and

WHEREAS, the City Design Review Board completed a favorable review of this Station 57 project. The Design Review Board initially reviewed the project plans on February 17, 2016, March 22, 2016. On June 7, 2016, the Design Review Board completed a review of the revised site plan (avoidance of wetland fill). The Board unanimously recommended approval of the revised project design and required some minor design changes and final details to return to the Board for review; and

WHEREAS, the City conducted substantial outreach to the community to present the project plans and obtain feedback. The outreach, which included a public open house, working group meetings and presentations to community groups, resulted in refinements and improvements to the project plans. As part of this process, concerns were raised regarding issues such as impacts to, among others, potential historic resources, circulation/access, tree removal and building height; and

WHEREAS, on August 23, 2016, the Planning Commissionheld a duly noticed public hearing to review and consider the Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED15-082) and Variance (V16-005),and considered all oral and written public testimony and the written report of the Community Development Department; and

WHEREAS,pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, the Fire Station 57 project is subject to environmental review. An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and accompanying Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) have been prepared. The Planning Commission has reviewed and adopted/approved these documents by separate resolution. The mitigation measures recommended by the MMRP have been incorporated into the conditions of approval for ED15-082 and V16-005 presented below; and

WHEREAS, the custodian of documents which constitute the record of proceedings upon which this decision is based, is the Community Development Department.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission approves Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED15-082) and Use Permit (V16-005)based on the following findings:

Findings for Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED15-082)

  1. As proposed and as conditioned, Fire Station 57is in accord with the San Rafael General Plan 2020in that:
  1. The Land Use Map of the Land Use Element designates the project site in the land use category of Public/Quasi-Public, which permitsgovernment or quasi-public buildings or facilities and essential services. As an essential service, the Fire Station 57 facilities and uses would be consistent with this land use designation.
  2. As proposed, the intensity of the project (floor area ratio of 0.31) is below and is consistent with Land Use Element Policy LU-9 (Intensity of Non-residential Development), which sets a floor area ratio limit (FAR) of 1.0for the subject property. Further, the project is designed to be well below the maximum building height limit of 36 feet as set forth for the property by Land Use Element Exhibit 8 (Building Height Limits for North San Rafael).
  3. As proposed, the building design is consistent with Neighborhood Element Policies NH-2 (New Development in Residential Neighborhoods), NH-8 (Parking), as well as Community Design Element Policies CD-1 (City Image) and CD-2 (Neighborhood Identity). Specifically, the facility has been designed to be compatible with the scale of improvements in the neighborhood and the diversely of building designs that are found in this area.
  4. As proposed, the project would not be in conflict with Community Design Element Policy CD-4 (Historic Resources),Culture and Arts Element Policy CA-13 (Historic Buildings and Areas) and NH-86 (Design Considerations for Development in the Vicinity of the Civic Center). As part of the environmental review process for this project, a historic assessment of the existing Fire Station 57 was completed by a qualified architectural historian. The architectural historian found that although the station site is located within the Marin County Civic Center National Register District (National Historic District), the existing station structure is not a contributor to this district and does not meet the criteria to qualify as a historic resource. Demolition of the existing building will not compromise or impact the National Register District. Lastly, the fire station building has been designed to meet the Marin County Civic Center Master Design Guidelines and the design has been favorably reviewed by the Frank Lloyd Wright Civic Center Conservancy, which provides County oversite for this historic district.
  5. As proposed and as conditioned, the project would be consistent with Conservation Element Policy CON-3 (Wetland Protection and Mitigation) in that it avoids the filling of a 0.09-acre jurisdictional wetland. While the proposed design would not comply with Conservation Element Policy CON-4 (Wetland Setbacks), a minimal setback/buffer has been designed to ensure the protection of the wetland. Further, a waiver of the minimum 50-foot development-free setback/buffer has been reviewed by a qualified wetland expert who found that the reduced setback is adequate and acceptable in that: 1) with the exception of a hydrologic connection to downstream waterways, the wetland is isolated; 2) the wetland has limited biological resource value; and 3) fencing and landscaping are recommended to ensure the protection of the wetland. A separate Variance application (V16-005) has been requested the waiver of the 50-foot setback requirement and the required findings can be met to approve this Variance.
  6. As proposed, the project would be consistent with Circulation Element Policy C-4 (Safe Roadway Design) and C-5 (Travel Level of Service Standards) in that: 1) a traffic study has been prepared which finds that the project would not change or impact the Level of Service standard set for the area (LOS D); and 2) project access has been designed to provide safe egress for fire apparatus during an emergency response.
  7. The process that has been undertaken for the proposed Fire Station 57 project is consistent with and would implement Community Design Element Policy CD-15 (Participation in Project Review), Infrastructure Element Policy I-5 (Public Involvement) and Governance Element Policies G-8 (City and Community Communication) and G-9 (Advisory Committees). As part of the public process for this project, the City conducted substantial outreach to the community to present the plans and obtain feedback. The outreach, which included a public open house, working group meetings and presentations to community groups, resulted in refinements and improvements to the project plans. As part of this process, concerns were raised regarding issues such as impacts to, among others, potential historic resources, circulation/access, tree removal and building height.
  8. As proposed, the project would implement Safety Element Policies S-26 (Fire and Police Services) and S-29 (Public Safety Facilities) in that it would provide an essential service facility that would be centralized, thus being more cost effective for operations and efficient.
  9. The project is consistent with Sustainability Element Programs SU-5a (Green Building Regulations) and SU-5c (Water Efficient Programs) in that it has been designed to meet the: 1) LEED Gold standard; 2) CalGreen Tier 1 green building standards; and 3) MMWD Water Conservation Ordinances 429 & 430.
  1. As proposed and as conditioned, the proposed project is consistent with the objectives and the provisions of the San Rafael Zoning Ordinance (SRMC Chapter 14). Specifically, the proposed fire stationuse is consistent with the P/QP District. Further, the project design and layout meet the minimum requirements set forth in the P/QP District including: a) compliance with the floor area ratio (FAR) limits; b) lot coverage and setback standards; c) minimum landscape coverage (10% of lot area); and d) off-street parking. Further, the project complies with the 36-foot building height limit of this District.
  2. As proposed and as conditioned, the project design is consistent with all applicable site, architecture and landscaping design criteria and guidelines set forth in SRMC Chapter 14.25 (Environmental and Design Review Permits) for the site in that:
  1. As proposed, the site plan is acceptable for the site and intended use is generally harmonious with the variety of urban uses and improvements surrounding the project site. The project site plan has been designed to integrate with but not replicate or conflict with the Marin County Civic Center site and improvements.
  2. As proposed and as conditioned, the project presents a competent design which has been prepared by a licensed architect skilled in designing public facility buildings. As determined by the Design Review Board, the project is well-designed and is appropriate for its setting. Conditions of approval require that the final design of the building be revised to address the recommendations of the Design Review Board and return to the Board for review and approval.
  3. The project proposes site access and circulation that promotes safe access for emergency vehicles and apparatus without impairing street circulation. Further, the project proposes ample off-street parking for essential facilities.
  4. The project presents an energy-efficient design and will be required to comply with the City’s Green Building Ordinance.
  5. The project is designed to adequately accommodate site drainage and incorporates measures to filter site runoff.
  6. The project is designed to provide a water efficient landscape. As required by SRMC Section 14.16.370, the landscape plan is consistent with Marin Municipal Water District Water Conservation Ordinance 430.
  1. As proposed and as conditioned, the project design and improvements would not result in adverse environmental impacts in that:
  1. Technical supportive studies prepared by qualified technical experts were commission by the City in environmental topic areas of, among others, historic resources, archaeological resources, geology/soils, hazards and hazardous materials, traffic/circulation, to assess the potential environmental impacts of the project.
  2. Consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, the supportive technical studies were used in the preparation of an Initial Study. The Initial Study concluded that all potentially-significant environmental impacts of the project can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level.The Planning Commission has adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration by separate resolution.
  3. Mitigation measures recommended in the Initial Study had been incorporated as conditions of approval in this Environmental and Design Review Permit.
  1. As proposed and as conditioned, the project will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. As noted above, the project site is fully developed with similar improvements and uses, which have not been nor in their operations are detrimental to the health, safety or welfare of the community. In fact, the project would promote the continuation of an essential City facility, which is critical to the protection of public safety and health to the community at large. While the site contains a 0.09-acre jurisdictional wetland, the project site plan has been designed to avoid filling this wetland and an adequate setback/buffer is provided to minimize impacts to this wetland.

Findings for Variance(V16-005)

  1. There are special and unusual circumstances applicable to the property for which the strict application of SRMC Section 14.13.040.B.2 (minimum 50-foot development-free setback/buffer from a designated wetland) significantly deprives the subject property from the privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning conditions in that:
  1. The current land area leased to the City by the Council of Marin is constrained and limited in its development potential. The immediate area contains a 0.09-acre jurisdictional wetland, whichrepresents approximately 12-13% of the initial leased land area. The jurisdictional wetland occupies much of the east central portion of the subject property, making this areaundevelopable unless this wetland is filled. In order to comply with General Plan Conservation Element Policy CON-3 (Wetland Protection and Mitigation), which is to avoid filling the wetland, the amount of remaining land area for development of this essential use and facility is extremely limited.
  2. With the avoidance of wetland filling per Policy CON-3, full compliance with the minimum 50-foot development free wetland setback/buffer as required by Policy CON-4 and the provisions of the zoning ordinance is impossible, as it would not result in adequate land area for maneuvering fire apparatus and essential emergency service vehicles on the project site.
  3. The 0.9-acre jurisdictional wetland is exclusive and unique to the project site in that it does not extend to developed lands north, east or south of the site.
  1. The granting of this variance will not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zoning district in which these properties are situated. As stated in Finding #1, the subject property is unique in that it contains a 0.9-acre jurisdictional wetland, which is not present on properties immediately contiguous to the project site.
  1. That granting the variance does not authorize a use or activity which is not otherwise expressly authorized by the zoning regulations for the zoning district in which the subject property is located. As stated in Finding #1, the subject property is unique in that it contains a 0.9-acre jurisdictional wetland, which is not present on properties immediately contiguous to the project site.
  1. The granting of this Variance to waive the City’s wetland setback requirements of SRMC Section 14.13.040B.2 would not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity of the development site, or to the public health, safety or general welfare. The City of San Rafael Fire Station 57 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (July 18, 2016), which has been adopted by the Planning Commission by separate resolution concludes and finds:
  1. The 0.9-acre jurisdictional wetland located on the site is isolated and has limited biological resource value. By avoiding the filling of this wetland to comply with Conservation Element Policy CON-3, the waiver from the wetland setback/buffer policy and zoning standard is necessary.
  2. The health and general welfare of the wetland would not be compromised by permitting a reduced setback/buffer provided that adequate protection measures are incorporated into the project design. The project is design and conditioned to include a protective fence and native landscaping within the setback/buffer.
  3. The waiver and the reduce wetland setback/buffer has been reviewed by a qualified wetland expert who finds that it is adequate and acceptable provided that fencing and landscaping is installed to ensure the protection of the wetland.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission approves Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED15-082) and Variance(V16-005)subject to the following conditions:

Top View