HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-05PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -05
RECOMMENDING THE HERITAGE RESOURCE COMMISSION APPROVE A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL
SIGNIFICANCE AND APPROVE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN REQUEST
DEV10 -0064, VARIANCE REQUEST VAR10 -0016, MASTER SIGN PROGRAM
REVIEW REQUEST SR10 -0024, TREE REMOVAL REQUEST TR10 -0022, AND
MAJOR SUBDIVISION REQUEST SD 9292 ALLOWING REDEVELOPMENT OF
THE 1.12 + / ACRE DANVILLE HOTEL PROPERTY INTO A MIXED USE
COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
(APN: 208 - 023 -003; -004; -008; -009; and -024)
WHEREAS, DANVILLE HOTEL HOLDINGS, LTD. (Owners) and CASTLE
COMPANIES, INC. (Applicants) have requested approval of Final Development
Plan request DEV10 -0064, Variance request VAR10 -0016, Master Sign Program
Review request SR10 -0024, Tree Removal request TR10 -0022, and Major Subdivision
request SD 9292 to authorize the redevelopment of the 1.12 + /- acre Danville Hotel
property with a mixed use commercial and residential development; and
WHEREAS, t he subject site is located at southeast corner of the intersection of
Railroad Avenue and East Prospect Avenue and the southwest corner of the
intersection of Hartz Avenue and East Prospect Avenue and is further identified as
Assessor's Parcel Number 208 - 023 -003; -004; -008; -009; and -024; and
WHEREAS, the Final Development Plan request seeks authorization for the
demolition of 14,387 square feet of existing retail, office, food service, and personal
service use space on the Danville Hotel site and the construction of approximately
34,585 square feet of new residential (up to 18 individual residential units), retail,
and. food service use space which is proposed to be served by the corresponding
construction of a 9 + /- square foot at -grade parking structure (28 parking
spaces), 2,250 + /- square feet of common, conditioned elevator/ stairwell support
area, 2,250 + /- square feet of common, conditioned residential support area, 1,050+/ -
square feet of common, unconditioned mechanical support area, and construction of
associated landscaping and parking/ driveway improvements and construction of
new and replacement project public frontage improvements (i.e., curb, gutter,
sidewalk, street light, mid -block lighted crosswalk, bulb -out i mprovements, a nd
associated project frontage and onsite and offsite storm drain and storm water
treatment and storage improvements); and
WHEREAS, the Variance request would allow: (a) building height variances (38'
height requested at several locations and 44' height requested for two elevator
towers - where a maximum 37' building height standard applies); (b) average front
PAGE 1 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
yard building setback variances along Hartz Avenue (2' -8" to 12' -0" setbacks with a
5' -0" average setback requested - where a 10' -0" minimum average setback
standard applies), along Prospect Avenue (5' -0" to 17-0" setbacks with a 6' -3"
average setback requested - where a 10' -0" minimum average setback standard
applies), and along Railroad Avenue (0' -0" to 3' -0" setbacks with a 2' -0" average
setback requested - where a 10' -0" minimum average setback standard applies); (c)
numerical parking variance for the proposed residential component of the project
(28 parking spaces proposed where a 33.75 parking space standard applies); (d)
dimensional parking variances (to allow use of tandem loaded parking spaces
within the onsite parking structure that will serve the residential component of the
project); (e) variance from the minimum required coverage of landscape
improvements ( <5% requested /20% minimum required); and (f) numerical parking
variance to allow a heightened dependency on municipal parking facilities -
providing 119 of 153 parking space demand to be handled by dependency on
municipal parking facilities where historic dependency has been 96 of 129 parking
space demand and where dependency on municipal parking facilities for that
portion of a project exceeding a floor area ratio (FAR) of 80% is required to be
handled through provision of onsite parking; and
WHEREAS, the Master Sign Program Review request seeks conceptual approval of
tenant wall- mounted signs, shingle signs, and mini -pole free - standing signs and for
center freestanding and directory signs; and
WHEREAS, the Tree Removal request seeks authorization to remove a 38 "- diameter
Heritage Tree (Redwood tree); and
WHEREAS, the Major Subdivision request seeks approval to divide the property
through recordation of one or more condominium maps for financing purposes
and /or for the purpose of creating lots and /or condominium lots to facilitate the
phasing of project construction and /or sale of the residential units proposed in the
project; and
WHEREAS, a Historic Resource Evaluation prepared for the site found that the
existing Danville Hotel and the McCauley House have historic significance; and
WHEREAS, the Danville Historic Preservation Ordinance requires the approval of a
Certificate of Approval prior to the allowance of modifications to historic buildings;
and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA), a draft Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance
PAGE 2 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
has been prepared for the project indicating that, as modified through project
revisions and /or recommended conditions of approval, no significant adverse
environmental impacts are expected to be associated with the project; and
WHEREAS, a staff report was submitted recommending that the Planning
Commission recommend the Heritage Resource Commission approve the project;
and
WHEREAS, the public notice of this action was given in all respects as required by
law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and consider all reports,
recommendations, and testimony submitted in writing and presented at the hearing
concerning the project at a noticed public hearing on March 22, 2011; now,
therefore, be it
RESOLVED that the Danville Planning Commission recommends the Danville
Heritage Resource Commission approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration of
Environmental Significance and approve planning entitlement requests DEV10-
0064, VAR10 -0016, SR10 -0024, TR10 -0022, and SD 9292, and makes the following
findings in support of this action:
FINDINGS OF APPROVAL
Final Development Plan Request:
1. The owners/ applicants intend to obtain permits for construction within 30
months from the effective date of project approval.
2. The development will be an attractive and efficient development which will
fit harmoniously into and will have no adverse effects upon the adjacent or
surrounding development.
3. The project is substantially consistent with the DBD; Downtown Business
District Area 11 - Special Opportunity Site zoning standards, is consistent
with previous Final Development Plan approvals for projects involving a
historic building, and is consistent with the Town's vision for the
redevelopment of the area and the creation of a pedestrian oriented character
described for the core downtown area by goals and policies of the Downtown
Master Plan.
PAGE 3 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
4. The proposed Final Development Plan request is in substantial conformance
with the goals and policies of the Danville 2010 General Plan and the
Downtown Master Plan, with specific conformance to the following goals and
policies acknowledged through adoption of this finding:
The project is consistent with the Goals and Policies of the 2010 General Plan,
specifically Policies: 1.02 (scale, appearance and character of development);
1.04 (provide higher density residential development near shopping centers
and bus routes); 1.06 (cumulative effects of development on community
facilities and services); 1.09 (promote land use compatibility through design
measures); 2.01 (achieve high standard of residential design); 2.07 (improve
appearance of the community by encouraging aesthetically designed
buildings, screening, adequate setbacks and landscaping); 3.01 (provide
adequate pedestrian, bicycle and parking facilities); 3.08 (encourage the reuse
of vacant and underutilized commercial buildings for more economically
productive purposes, including new businesses, housing, and mixed use
development); 4.02 (promote affordable housing); 5.06 (growth management
policy relating to local and regional transportation system); 5.07 (growth
management policy relating to parks, fire, police, sanitary sewer, water and
flood control services); 9.02 (parkland acreage -per- resident performance
standard); 11.01 (ensure new development pays fair share of the cost of civic
and community facilities); 11.06 (ensure new development contributes its fair
share towards development of school facilities); 12.01 (maintain roadways
and traffic controls in safe and effective operating conditions); 13.03 (assure
provision of adequate bicycle support facilities at all major bicycle usage
locations); 14.02 (improve major collectors and arterials to a high level of
service, balancing the needs of motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists); 15.03
(promote bicycle and pedestrian oriented mixed use development in
appropriate locations); 15.05 (require design measures to accommodate access
by pedestrians, bicycles and transit); 17.07 (protect surface water from
pollution); 18.09 (encourage recycling); 19.05 (pursue "best management
practices" for controlling stormwater runoff impacts); 20.06 (ensure
appropriate structural and engineering standards are implemented); 21.04
(fire services response time performance standard); 23.01 (residential
development to meet noise level guidelines); 24.05 (promote development
patterns that reduce the need to travel by car); and 26.01 (police services
response time performance standard).
5. The proposed project is consistent with the intent and requirements of the
DBD; Downtown Business District Ordinance.
PAGE 4 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
6. The Final Development Plan ensures the rehabilitation of historic resources
and recognizes such resources as an essential part of the Danville's heritage.
7. The proposed project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and general
welfare of the Town.
8. The proposed project is consistent with the Town's Historic Preservation
Ordinance 32 -72 and the Danville Design Guidelines for Heritage Resources.
9. The Final Development Plan observes the recommended approaches for
building additions and modifications and for new construction on historic
sites and was evaluated by an historic architect.
10. The uses authorized or proposed in the land use district are compatible
within the district and to uses authorized in adjacent districts.
11. Community need has been demonstrated for the uses proposed.
Major Subdivision Request:
1. The proposed subdivision is in substantial conformance with the goals and
policies of the Danville 2010 General Plan.
2. The design of the proposed subdivision is in substantial conformance with
the applicable zoning regulations.
3. The design of the subdivision and the type of associated improvements will
not likely cause serious public health problems because water and sanitary
facilities services will be available to the project.
4. The density of the subdivision is physically suitable for the proposed density
of development.
5. The design of the proposed subdivision and improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage or subsequently injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat since this property is in an area where development
has previously occurred.
6. The design of the proposed subdivision and proposed improvements will not
conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or
use of, property within the proposed subdivision.
PAGE 5 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
Master Sign Program Sign Review Request:
1. The signage will be consistent in character with the Danville Commercial
Design Guidelines (set forth in the DBD), will be compatible with project
architecture, and will be no larger than necessary for adequate identification.
2. The signage will serve primarily to identify the business, establishment or
type of activity conducted on the premises, or the product, service or interest
being exhibited or offered for sale, rent or lease on the premises.
3. The signage will not excessively compete for the public's attention.
4. The signage will be harmonious with the materials, color, texture, size, shape,
height, location, design, and in proportion with the architectural style of the
building, property or environment of which they are a part.
5. The design of the signage will be consistent with professional graphic and
structural standards.
6. Signage illumination will be at the lowest level consistent with adequate
identification and readability.
Variance Requests:
1. The variances do not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with
the limitations on other properties in the area or carrying the DBD;
Downtown Business District - Area 11: Special Opportunity Site designation.
2. Because of the following special circumstances applicable to the property,
strict application of the zoning regulations would deprive the subject
property of rights enjoyed by others in the general vicinity and /or located in
the same zoning district:
(a) The property contains two buildings of historic significance and is
eligible to receive consideration of flexible development standards,
including floor area ratio (FAR), numerical parking, dimensional
parking, building height, and minimum landscape area coverage
variances. Collectively, these variances serve to allow additional floor
area to be developed in the project, thereby allowing for the reasonable
development of the property without the destruction of the historically
significant buildings. The mass and scale of the development is
PAGE 6 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
consistent with the DBD - Area 11 development standards and
consistent with Danville's vision for the development of the area.
(b) The proposed variances are not a grant of special privilege as other
historic properties in the downtown area have been granted variances
allowing for the reasonable development of the property while
preserving and rehabilitating the historic building on the site.
3. The variances are in substantial conformance with the intent and purpose of
the DBD; Downtown Business District Area 11 - Special Opportunity Site in
which the subject property is located. The redevelopment of the subject
property will be constructed generally behind, or adequately spaced to the
side of, the historic buildings located along the Hartz Avenue frontage,
consistent with the historic development patterns of the Downtown.
Tree Removal Request:
1. The Town - protected Heritage Tree (38" diameter Redwood tree) overwhelms
the subject property due to its size, has indications of having caused damage
to existing physical improvements present on the site, and would
significantly compromise the ability to redevelop the site if the tree had to be
retained in a redevelopment project.
2. The removal of the tree will not have a negative effect upon soil erosion nor
will it result in a significant diversion or increase in the flow of surface water
because the property is relatively flat.
3. The removal of the tree will not have a negative effect upon shade or privacy
between properties or the scenic beauty of the area due to the location of the
tree on the subject property (i.e., centrally located on the property) and its
relative location to improvements on surrounding properties. Further, the
removal of the tree will be mitigated through imposition of a project
condition of approval requiring mitigation plantings.
Certificate of Approval:
1. The proposed removal of the non - historic portion of the Danville Hotel and
the associated building modifications to that building and to the McCauley
House will not adversely affect the historically significant exterior
architectural features of the buildings or the special character, interest or
value of their neighboring improvements and surroundings, including
PAGE 7 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
facade, window and door design, roof shapes, scale, height and relationship
of material, color and texture.
2. The reviewing body relied upon the most current version of the Secretary of
the Interior's "Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating
Historic Buildings," the State Historic Building Code, the Danville Design
Guidelines for Heritage Resources, and the updated third -party historic
architect evaluation prepared for the project (i.e., "Historical Evaluation -
Rehabilitation of the Danville Hotel & Danville Hotel Territories ", Knapp &
Ver Plank Preservation Architects, dated November 15, 2010).
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Conditions of approval with an asterisk ( "") in the left -hand column are standard project
conditions of approval. Conditions of approval typed in italicized text are mitigation
measures derived from the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance
prepared for the project.
Unless otherwise specified, the following conditions shall be complied with prior to approval
of the final map or issuance of grading or building permits for the project.
Each item is subject to review and approval by the Planning Division unless otherwise
specified.
A. GENERAL
1. This approval is for Final Development Plan request Dev10 -0064,
Variance request VAR10 -0016, Master Sign Program Review request
SR10 -0024, Tree Removal request TR10 -0022, and Major Subdivision
request SD 9292 providing for redevelopment of the 1.124 acre
Danville Hotel site into a mixed use commercial and residential
development. Development shall be substantially as shown on the
project drawings and project studies as follows:
(a) Site Plans, Roof Plan, Building Elevation and Building Material
Plans, Floor Plans, and details labeled "Danville Hotel ",
depicting the proposed development as prepared by William
Hezmalhalch Architects, Inc. and consisting of 16 sheets dated
November 12, 2010.
(b) Tentative Map, Preliminary Grading and Utility Plan,
Demolition Plan, and Aerial Photo ", depicting the proposed
PAGE 8 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
development as prepared by Carlson, Barbee & Gibson, Inc. and
consisting of four sheets dated February 16, 2011.
(c) Conceptual Landscape Plan, Sections, Elevations, Details and
Character Imagery labeled "Danville Hotel ", depicting the
proposed development as prepared by Gates + Associates and
consisting of two sheets dated February, 2011.
(d) Final Traffic Impact Study for Danville Hotel Expansion, as
prepared by TJKM Transportation Consultants, and consisting of
34 pages and associated appendices and dated February 23,
2011.
(e) Preliminary Stormwater Control Plan labeled "Danville Hotel
Site ", addressing onsite and offsite stormwater treatment options
and obligations as prepared by Carlson, Barbee & Gibson, Inc.
and consisting of 19 pages and associated appendices and dated
February 15, 2011.
(f) Preliminary Geotechnical Report labeled "Danville Hotel Site ",
providing the preliminary soil and geotechnical findings for the
project site as prepared by ENGEO, Inc. and consisting of 10
pages and associated figures and dated July 13, 2010.
(g) Phase I Environmental Site Assessment for the Danville Hotel
Site, as prepared by Light, Air & Space Construction and
consisting of 38 pages and associated appendices and dated May
14, 2010.
(h) Third -party historic architect evaluation entitled "Historical
Evaluation - Rehabilitation of the Danville Hotel & Danville
Hotel Territories ", as prepared by Knapp & Ver Plank
Preservation Architects and dated November 15, 2010.
2. This entitlement includes the approval of building height variances,
average minimum front setback variances, numerical and dimensional
parking variances, minimum required coverage of landscape variance,
and a FAR /provision of minimum onsite parking variance. To provide
reasonable flexibility to the developer to secure ground floor tenants,
the project's aggregate numerical parking demand for the commercial
portion of the project is pre- authorized for a 5.0% (i.e., six parking
PAGE 9 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
space) upward deviation beyond the projected 125 space numerical
parking demand.
3. The developer shall be responsible for the payment of all development
processing fees and impact fees associated with the project. The fee
amounts to be paid shall be reflective of the fee schedules in effect at
the time payment is made, with fees to be paid prior to approval of the
final map or issuance of grading or building permits. In addition to
various plan checking and inspection fees, notice should be taken of the
following fee categories that will be applicable to the project:
(a) Map Check Fee
(b) Improvement Plan Check Fee
(c) Engineering Inspection Fee
(d) Grading Plan Check, Inspection & Permit
(e) Child Care Facilities - Comm.($0.25 @ 1,835 sf)
(f) Child Care Facilities - Resdnt'1 ($115/du)
(g) Parkland In -lieu Fee - Residnt'1 ($ 5,168/ du)
(h) FC &WCD Drain.Area (DA) 10 Fee ($0.34/sf)
(i) FC &WCD San Ramon Creek DA Fee ($0.10 /sf)
(j) Storm Water Pollution Program Fee - Comm.
(k) Storm Water Pollution Program Fee - Resdnt'1
(1) SCC Regional Fee - Comm. ($1.17/sf)
(m) SCC Regional Fee - Resdnt'1 ($1,175/du)
(n) SCC Sub - Regional Fee - Comm. ($2.55/sf)
(o) SCC Sub - Regional Fee - Resdnt'1($2,600 /du)
(p) Commercial TIP Fee ($4.50 /sf)
(q) Residential TIP Fee ($1,400 / du)
(r) Tri- Valley Transp. Fee - Comm. ($1.45/sf)
(s) Tri - Valley Transp. Fee - Resdnt'1($1,308 /du)
(t) Building Plan Check and Inspection Fees
Waiver of Town - controlled fees may be considered in conjunction with
Town Council review and action on the project's historic preservation
incentive packet, requiring a separate and subsequent of review from
the review and action on the subject planning entitlement requests.
4. Within thirty days of the effective date of this approval, the developer
shall reimburse the Town for notifying surrounding residents and
interested parties of the public hearings and study sessions for the
project. The fee shall be $229.52 ($110.00 + 144 notices X $0.83 per
notice).
PAGE 10 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
5. Prior to the issuance of grading or building permits, the developer shall
submit written documentation that all requirements of the San Ramon
Valley Fire Protection District have been, or will be, met to the
satisfaction of the District. The District's initial comments on this
project are dated October 7, 2010.
6. Prior to the issuance of building permits for the residential portion of the
project, the developer shall verify that payment of the applicable school impact
fees have been paid to the San Ramon Valley Unified School District.
(Mitigation Measure #14.a.)
7. Prior to the issuance of building permits for the residential portion of the
project, the developer shall make payment to the Town of the applicable
parkland in -lieu fees. (Mitigation Measure #14.b.)
8. The developer shall submit to the Town of Danville fees required to file
a Notice of Determination for this project as required by AB 3185.
Within five days of the project approval, the developer shall submit to
the Town a check in the amount of $2,044.00 made out to the
Department of Fish and Game and a check in the amount of $50.00
made out to the Contra Costa County Clerk related to the posting of
the Notice of Determination for the project.
9. In the event that subsurface archeological remains are discovered during any
construction or pre - construction activities on the site, all land alteration work
within 100 feet of the find shall be halted, the Development Services
Department notified, and a professional archeologist, certified by the Society of
California Archeology and /or the Society of Professional Archeology, shall be
notified. Site work in this area shall not occur until the archeologist has had
an opportunity to evaluate the significance of the find and to outline
appropriate mitigation measures, if they are deemed necessary. If prehistoric
archaeological deposits are discovered during development of the site, local
Native American organizations shall be consulted and involved in making
resource management decisions. (Mitigation Measure #5.a.)
10. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall hire a historical
resource consultant to determine whether the site contains historic resources.
The findings of the consultant shall be submitted in written form to the
Planning Division and to the Northwest Information Center of the California
Historical Resources Information System at Sonoma State University. All
work shall comply with the requirements of the California Historical
Resources Information System. (Mitigation Measure #5.b.)
PAGE 11 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
11. The developer shall require their contractors and subcontractors to fit all
internal combustion engines with mufflers, which are in good condition, and
to locate stationary noise - generating equipment as far away from existing
residences as feasible. (Mitigation Measure #12.a.)
12. Construction activity shall be restricted to the period between the weekday
hours of 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. (Mondays through Fridays), unless otherwise
approved in writing by the City Engineer for general construction activity and
the Chief Building Official for building construction activity. Prior to any
construction work on the site, including grading, the developer shall install a
3' x 3' sign at the project entry which specifies the allowable construction
work days and hours, and lists the name and contact person for the overall
project manager and all contractors and sub - contractors working on the job.
(Mitigation Measure #11.b.)
13. The developer shall provide security fencing, to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer and /or the Chief Building Official, around the site
during construction of the project. All security fencing shall be fitted
with woven polyethylene privacy and windscreen fabric, 85%
minimum closed mesh with grommets for securing to chain link fabric.
14. A watering program, which incorporates the use of a dust suppressant and
which complies with Regulation 2 of the Bay Area Air Quality Management
District, shall be established and implemented for all on- and off -site
construction activities. Equipment and human resources for watering all
exposed or disturbed soil surfaces shall be supplied on weekends and holidays
as well as workdays. Dust - producing activities shall be discontinued during
high wind periods. (Mitigation Measure #3.a.)
15. All physical improvements shall be in place prior to occupancy of any
building in the project. If occupancy within the project is requested to
occur in phases, all physical improvements serving that phase shall be
required to be in place prior to occupancy, except for items specifically
excluded in a construction- phases occupancy plan approved by the
Planning Division. No building shall be occupied until heavy
construction activity in the adjoining area is complete, the area to be
occupied is determined to be safe, accessible, provided with all
reasonably expected services and amenities, and is appropriately
separated from remaining additional construction activity.
16. As part of the initial submittal for the demolition permit and /or
building permit review process (whichever occurs first), the developer
PAGE 12 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
shall submit a written Compliance Report detailing how the conditions
of approval for this project have been complied with. This report shall
list each condition of approval followed by a description of what the
developer has provided as evidence of compliance with that condition.
The report is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer,
Chief of Planning, and /or Chief Building Official, and may be rejected
if it is determined to not be comprehensive with respect to the
applicable conditions of approval.
17. The residential units developed in the project may be used for home
occupation uses, as that activity is defined in Section 32 -2.2 ( "Words
and Phrases Defined ") of the Danville Municipal Code. The home
occupation use shall be clearly ancillary to the primary, residential use
of the unit they are located within. Home occupation compliance
reports shall be processed through the Planning Division and business
license applications shall be processed through the Finance Department
before home occupation uses are established in the project.
18. Except as provided for through these project conditions of approval,
development of the commercial portion of the project, and the
allowable and conditionally allowable uses established within this
portion of the project, shall comply with DBD; Downtown Business
District Area 11 - Special Opportunity Site standards.
19. Planning Division approval is required prior to final occupancy being
authorized for any building in the project by the Building Division.
20. The developer shall create a construction staging plan that addresses
the ingress and egress location for all construction vehicles, parking
and material storage area. This plan shall be subject to review and
approval by the Planning and Engineering Divisions prior to the
issuance of a demolition permit, grading permit, or building permit.
No staging or storage shall occur in the public right -of -way or on
publically owned property unless preauthorization is secured from the
Engineering Division through an encroachment permit.
21. Prior to the establishment and use of exterior seating for the proposed
food service uses in the project, business - specific land use permit
approvals shall be secured.
PAGE 13 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
22. Except as provided for by Section 32 -45.27 of the DBD regulations
( "Outdoor Display of Merchandise Criteria'), no exterior storage or
display of merchandise is permitted within the commercial portion of
the project without prior review and approval through a land use
permit application.
23. Without prior approval of a tenant - specific land use permit, only retail
or food service uses, as set forth in the DBD; Downtown Business
District, shall be established as ground -floor uses in the commercial
portion of the project.
24. Pursuant to the regulations contained in the California Uniform Retail
Food Facilities Law, food service uses established in this project shall
submit plans to the Contra Costa Environmental Health Division
( CCEHD) for review and approval prior to issuance of the respective
tenant building permits for such food service uses. A CCEHD permit
shall be secured for each retail food facility established in the project.
25. No post - completion exterior modifications to buildings established in
this mixed use project shall occur without prior review and approval of
a Revised Final Development Plan application, which may be
processed as an administrative permit unless a Planning Division
determination is made that the request constitutes a significant
alteration to the affected building.
26. If grading or tree removal is proposed during the raptor nesting season (i.e.,
between February through August), a focused tree pre - construction survey for
raptor nests shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to determine if active
nests are present on the project site. The survey shall be conducted no less
than 14 days, and no more than 30 days, prior to the beginning of grading or
tree removal activity. If nesting raptors are found during the focused survey,
no grading or tree removal shall occur until the young have fledged (as
determined by a qualified biologist). If impacts to nest trees are unavoidable,
they shall be removed during the non - breeding season. (Mitigation Measure
#4.a.)
B. SITE PLANNING
1. Exterior wall- mounted lighting shall be at the minimum lighting intensity
necessary to provide adequate lighting for safety and security purposes.
Project light fixtures shall be of a design that generally screens the view of the
light source and provides down- directed lighting. Prior to the issuance of
PAGE 14 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
building permits, the developer shall submit a photometric plan as part of the
lighting plan that indicates lighting locations and fixture details and provides
the corresponding photometric information. This plan shall be subject to
review and approval by the Planning Division and Design Reviezv Board
(DRB). If required by the Planning Division and /or the DRB, field
modifications found necessary to prevent inappropriate levels of off -site light
intrusion and /or glare shall be made. (Mitigation Measure #1.a.)
2. The location of any pad mounted electrical transformers shall be
subject to review and approval by the Planning Division, DRB and
Historic Design Review Committee (HDRC) prior to the issuance of a
building permit. Unless determined not feasible by these reviewing
bodies, such transformers shall not be located between any street and
the front of a building and shall be adequately screened and mitigated
with appropriate landscaping.
3. The developer shall be responsible for the installation of bicycle storage
facilities serving both the commercial and residential components of
the project. The design, number, location and capacity of the storage
facilities shall be as determined acceptable by the Planning Division
and shall be installed no later than three months following the final
occupancy of the first new building securing building final.
4. The construction drawings and final map for the residential portion of
the project may depict up to a maximum of eighteen residential units.
The number of units that are built in the project is at the discretion of
the developer. The flexibility in residential unit count is provided to
allow options to the developer as to how the project's Community
Redevelopment Law (CRL) or Town of Danville inclusionary housing
obligation is met. If a seventeenth or eighteenth residential unit is
added beyond the proposed sixteen units, the aggregate square footage
of the residential portion of the project is authorized to increase a
maximum of 500 additional square feet.
C. LANDSCAPING
* 1. Final Landscape and Irrigation Plans (Landscape Plans), with planting
shown at 1 " =20' scale, shall be submitted for review and approval by
the Planning Division. The plan shall include common names of all
plant materials and shall indicate the size that various plant materials
will achieve within a five -year period of time.
PAGE 15 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
2. All plant material shall be served by an automatic underground
irrigation system and maintained in a healthy growing condition. The
irrigation system shall comply with East Bay Municipal Utility
District's Section 31 Water Efficiency requirements, including use of a
weather -based controller with soil moisture probe and rain - shutoff
switch.
3. The Final Landscape and Irrigation Plans submitted for the Project shall be
accompanied by a zvritten report prepared by the Project Landscape Architect
documenting hozv the plans comply zvith applicable outdoor zvater -use
efficiency recommendations and requirements in place at the time of their
submittal. The report shall, at a minimum, speak to conformance to applicable
East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) recommendations and
requirements and the State of California Department of Water Resources
requirements that zvould pertain to the project regarding the Water
Conservation in Landscaping Act of 2006 (AB 1881). (Mitigation Measure
#17.a.)
4. All trees shall be a minimum of 15- gallon container size. All trees shall
be properly staked. All shrubs used in the project, which are not used
as ground cover, shall be a minimum of five gallons in size.
* 5. All landscaped areas not covered by shrubs and trees shall be planted
with live ground cover. All proposed ground cover areas shall be
planted and maintained so that they fill in the affected landscape areas
within a two year period.
6. The Conceptual Landscape Plan is not approved as submitted relative
to: (a) the proposed placement of street trees and brick banding along
Railroad Avenue; (b) the proposed placement of decorative bollards at
back -of -curb locations at the east and west entries of the central
pedestrian corridor running between Hartz Avenue and Railroad
Avenue; (c) the proposed location for exterior seating within the central
pedestrian corridor that would serve the Sideboard Restaurant tenant
space; (d) the proposed placement of the westernmost "Flowering
Accent Tree" shown for linear planting in the pedestrian corridor; (e)
the proposed pavement treatment at the northwest corner of the
property that extends into the recently constructed bulb -out for the
Hartz Avenue and Prospect Avenue intersection; (f) placement of
"Special Monument Holiday Tree" planting along Railroad Avenue;
and (g) color selection for accent concrete placed between the street -
side of new buildings and the public gutter pan/curb. Conceptual
PAGE 16 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
design direction for these respective items, to be addressed with the
formalized design review as part of the HDRC /DRB review of Final
Landscape and Irrigation Plans, is as follows:
(a) Street tree planting and brick banding (placed in bands
extending perpendicularly from back of curb to building
footprint) along Railroad Avenue shall be modified to a 25' +/-
on center planting template, substantially consistent with the
Staff Study COA #C.7.(a). dated March 10, 2011 (included as
Exhibit O of the March 22 Staff Report for the project);
(b) Decorative bollards at east and west entries of the central
pedestrian corridor shall be pulled back to be wholly contained
on private property and with consideration given to the merits
of having low -level pedestrian lighting capabilities provided by
the design of the relocated bollards;
(c) Exterior seating for the remodeled Sideboard Restaurant tenant
space (beyond the seating on the raised deck along Hartz
Avenue) shall be depicted on a plan submittal for a revised Land
Use Permit for the tenant space's exterior seating, with such
seating encouraged to be placed in the northern limits of the
secondary north -south pedestrian corridor running along the
west side of the two historic buildings;
(d) The westernmost "Flowering Accent Tree' of the linear planting
in the pedestrian corridor shall be pulled into the project site the
equivalent depth of two sidewalk panels deeper into the east -
west central pedestrian corridor (complementing the placement
of the next accent tress relative the circular brick banding
treatment proposed in this area), so the tree does not "read" as a
Railroad Avenue street tree;
(e) Pavement /brick banding treatment in the bulb -out at the
northwest corner shall be substantially consistent with Staff
Study COA #C.7.(e). dated March 10, 2011 (included as Exhibit P
of the March 22 Staff Report for the project); and
(f) The "Special Monument
Holiday
Tree' planting
treatment
proposed along Railroad
Avenue
at the project's
northwest
corner (shown within the
bulb -out
extending into
the public
PAGE 17 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
right -of -way) shall be matched with one or two matching tree
plantings at the future northeast and southeast bulb -outs for the
proposed mid -block intersection at the intersection of Short
Street and Railroad Avenue; and
(g) Color selection for concrete in the pedestrian zone between the
street -side of new buildings and the back of curb of the public
sidewalk area shall be subject to review and approval by DRB,
with such review to benefit from onsite mock up concrete
samples and with a design directive to use a color that
compliments the standard color of public sidewalks.
7. The Project Landscape Architect shall calculate the diameter of the Tozvn-
protected Heritage Tree slated for removal (i.e., the Redzvood Tree currently
38" in diameter) as of the date of the grading permit application and submit
that calculation to the Planning Division. The developer shall be required to
mitigate the loss of the Heritage Tree zvith a number and size of oak trees (or
approved alternate tree species) equal to the total inches of diameter of the tree
to be removed. The required mitigation tree planting shall be in addition to the
street trees otherwise required to be planted as part of the project's landscape
plan. Since the project landscape plan zvill not accommodate the number of
trees necessary under this mitigation measure, credit for the remaining trees
shall be obtained through off -site oak planting (i.e., by "Off -Site Inches ")
and /or restoration as deemed acceptable to the Planning Division. The
developer may satisfy the off -site planting obligation in either of the tzvo
follozving manners (or in a combination of the tzvo):
(a) The developer may plant 24 -inch box trees zvith a cumulative diameter
equal to the Off -Site Inches (credited at 2 inches per 24 -inch box tree)
and install and maintain irrigation for those trees until they are
established, at an off -site location or locations to be approved by the
Planning Division; or
(b) The developer may, rather than planting trees itself, apply that cost to a
recognized, Planning Division - approved off -site planting or
restoration program.
(Mitigation Measure #4.b.)
8. Unless otherwise directed through the review of the Final Landscape
and Irrigation Plans, the street tree selections shall be Puyrus
calleryana ( "Autumn Blaze" or flowering pear) for Hartz Avenue,
PAGE 18 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
Pistache chinesis, ( "Chinese Pistache") for Prospect Avenue, and
Quercus rubra (an an oak in the red oak group) for Railroad Avenue.
9. The developer shall be responsible for installation of a dedicated
irrigation system constructed to current Town standards for watering
of those street trees planted as part of the project. Said system shall
include a separate water service with meter, a separate electrical
service with meter, and a multi- functional controller. The developer
may choose to investigate extending existing Town -owned systems in
lieu of the installation of a new system. Existing systems that may be
considered for possible extension are located within the adjacent
Railroad Avenue Municipal Parking Lot, the Clock Tower Municipal
Parking Lot, and the Veterans Memorial Building (upon completion of
the current remodel/ expansion project). All costs associated with
installation of a new system or the extension of an existing system shall
be the responsibility of the developer.
D. ARCHITECTURE
1. All ducts, meters, air conditioning and /or any other mechanical
equipment, whether on the building or on the ground, shall be
effectively screened from view with landscaping or materials
architecturally compatible with the main buildings. [See also COA #E.10.
belozv for additional requirements /direction for screening of mechanical
equipment and vents for the tzvo historic buildings.]
2. Trash, refuse and recycling shall be contained within a trash /recycling
enclosure that is architecturally compatible with the project
architecture. Unless otherwise authorized by the Planning Division,
the enclosure design and location shall be substantially as depicted on
the project drawings cited in Condition of Approval #A.1.a., above (i.e.,
shall be integrated as part of the structure containing the at -grade
parking facilities). The trash /recycling area shall have lockable and
self - closing doors. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the
developer shall coordinate with the project site's solid waste purveyor
to verify that the planned trash /recycling area is appropriately sized
and located to handled projected trash and recycling generation levels
for the project. The trash /recycling area shall be designed so as not to
allow stormwater run -off to enter the area from adjacent surfaces nor to
allow wastewater originating from the area to seep outside the area.
The area drain for the trash /recycling area shall be connected to the
PAGE 19 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
sanitary sewer, not the storm drain system. Since the trash area will
serve retail food facilities, it shall be equipped with a hot /cold water
supply that is satisfactory to the Contra Costa Environmental Health
Division.
3. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the proposed method to
denote street numbers for tenant spaces and residential units in the
project shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning
Division. Street numbering shall be posted so as to be easily seen from
the street at all times, day and night by emergency service personnel.
4. Samples of final materials and the proposed color palette shall be
submitted for review and approval by the Design Review Board (DRB)
prior to the issuance of building permits for new construction. Color
mock -ups shall be made available at the project site prior to scheduling
the project buildings for final DRB review. [See also COAs #E.7., #E.8.,
and #E.15 through #E.18 below for additional requirements /direction impacting
exterior building material selection involving both the tzi7o historic buildings and
the proposed new buildings.]
5. The second phase of the project's linear review of preliminary
architectural design shall provide for a review and approval of
architectural elevations, details and revisions by the DRB and the
Historic Design Review Committee (HDRC) a minimum of thirty days
prior to developer- initiation of the Building Division plan check
process. This layer of review shall provide project architectural details
as called for by the Danville Design Review Board Submittal
Requirement Checklist (as revised April 2000). The project
architectural sections developed and submitted for review shall
include, at a minimum, the eighteen sections presented to DRB at the
project's phase one preliminary architectural design of December 1,
2010 (refer to Staff Study C0A #D.1. dated March 15, 2011 included as
Exhibit Q of the March 22, 2011 staff report for the project).
6. To facilitate a more detailed review of the project's proposed building
massing and overall site planning, the second phase of the project's
linear review of preliminary architectural design shall include a 3D
wire frame model drawing in AutoCAD format, or as otherwise
determined acceptable to the Planning Division, detailing public views
of the new project building elevations (i.e., the Railroad Avenue,
Prospect Avenue and Hartz Avenue building elevations). If a
PAGE 20 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
determination is made by the Town to reduce the existing curb -to -curb
street section for Railroad Avenue with the project's reconstruction of
Railroad Avenue frontage improvements, pre- authorization is granted
to have up to 25% of Building 2's Railroad Avenue building frontage
narrowed a corresponding amount (i.e., pre- authorization is granted,
where the Railroad Avenue street section is authorized to be narrowed
from its current curb -to -curb width to decrease up to 25% of Building
2's Railroad Avenue front building setback by a corresponding amount
of the right -of -way width reduction - to a maximum of 2' -6 "). [See also
COA #H.6., belozo for additional requirements /direction regarding design and
construction of Railroad Avenue frontage improvements.]
7. In advance of submittal for the second phase of the project's linear
review of preliminary architectural design, the developer is
encouraged to incorporate design features into the project that add
architectural interest and detailing. Examples of items that would add
such architectural interest and detailing include: (a) integration of
unique project signage into project architecture; (b) recessing of
windows at first and second floors; (c) use of a water feature(s) as the
focal feature in the central pedestrian corridor; (d) use of custom
designed light fixtures; (e) use of high- end / elegant architectural
pottery; (f) use of different storefront styles; (g) use of a substantial
trellis as an entry treatment to the pedestrian corridors; (h) enhanced
paving details at storefront entries and /or on facings of project
stairways; (i) introduction of thematic motif detailing tying project
together project architecture; 0) selective second floor building setbacks
(to break up massing); (k) introduction of landscape planting (e.g.,
vines) on selected ground floor building elevations; (1) use of high -
end /elegant sign blades and accent lighting; (m) variation in signage
treatment and lighting; (n) variation in building plane where exterior
building material changes occurred; and (o) use of recesses between
top of wall and parapet roof features.
8. Final architectural elevations, details and revisions, presented in
construction plan detail, shall be submitted for review and approval by
the DRB prior to issuance of building permits for the project. Ten full
size sets of progress construction drawings for the project shall be
submitted for the review. This review may be concurrent with the plan
check review of building permits for new project construction.
PAGE 21 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
9. Details for Master Sign Program Sign Review request SR10 -0024 shall
be subject to review and approval by the DRB prior to building permit
issuance. At the discretion of DRB, SR10 -0024 may be referred to the
Planning Commission for review and action. [See also COA #E.14 and
belozu for additional requirements /direction impacting signage developed for
the tzoo historic buildings.]
10. Without prior authorization by the Planning Division, no windows in
the commercial portion of the project shall be utilized for permanent
window signage or shall have the visibility to the spaces they serve be
blocked by wall partitions, store fixtures, or displays. At the discretion
of the Planning Division, staff may refer requests that deviate from
these standards to the Planning Commission for review and action.
11. No window tinting is permitted in any windows or doors without
prior authorization from the Planning Division.
12. All temporary signage utilized by the tenants in this center shall
conform to the standards for temporary and promotional business
signage contained in the Danville Sign Ordinance.
13. Unless otherwise directed through building code regulations, roof
vents established on the residential buildings which are visible from
the surrounding public or private roadway system shall be limited to
low profile roof vents. All residential roof vents shall be painted a
color to blend with the roof and shall be painted with a flat finish.
14. In conjunction with the preparation of the final working drawings for
the residential buildings, efforts shall be made to maximize the size of
individual storage areas available to all project residential units. To the
extent reasonably feasible, each unit shall be supplied the following
storage areas: entry closet storage area; closet storage on the
patio /balcony areas; and overhead cabinet storage within garages. The
exact location, size and configuration of the storage areas shall be
subject to review and approval by the Planning Division prior to the
issuance of building permits.
15. The design of new buildings shall be modified, where such change
does not compromise the architectural design integrity of the project
buildings, to reduce maximum building heights to a maximum height
of 37 feet. An exception to this directive is granted for the two
PAGE 22 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
proposed elevator towers which are authorized for construction at the
building heights depicted on the project plans (i.e., 44'- 0 ").
E. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
1. The building renovation plans for the two historic buildings shall comply with
the Danville Design Guidelines for Historic Resources and the third -party
historic architect report cited in Condition of Approval #A.1.h., above.
(Mitigation Measure #5.c.)
2. Developer shall submit a structural report/building restoration plan for review
and approval by the Planning Division and Building Division prior to
issuance of a building permit to alter the exterior of the Danville Hotel
building (which is authorized to include the removal of the non - historic
portion of the building). The report shall include provisions for preservation
of the existing exterior materials, doors, trim or other significant historic
architectural features that may be affected by the proposed partial demolition of
the building. The report shall detail specific recommendations for foundation
design. The plans shall address how structural and /or seismic upgrades are
proposed to be implemented, with a goal of providing these improvements in
the least invasive method possible as relates to the exterior of the building.
(Mitigation Measure #5.d.)
3. Developer shall submit a building restoration plan for the McCauley House
building for Planning and Building Division review and approval. The plans
shall address how any required structural and /or seismic upgrades are to be
implemented, with a goal of providing these improvements in the least
invasive method possible as relates the exterior of the building. (Mitigation
Measure #5.e.)
4. Developer shall take all reasonable precautionary measures to ensure that the
two historic buildings will not be significantly damaged by the remodel effort.
If significant damage to either building occurs during remodeling efforts, the
owner shall immediately inform the Planning Division and develop a response
plan for review and approval. If it is found that exterior architectural elements
or materials that were intended to be maintained on the buildings are damaged
beyond repair, the developer shall be responsible for replacing the
element(s) /material with a historically accurate element(s) /material as
determined acceptable by the Historic Design Review Committee (HDRC). At
the discretion of the Planning Division or the HDRC, such modifications may
be referred to the Heritage Resource Commission for review and action.
(Mitigation Measure #51.)
PAGE 23 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
5. Nezu exterior materials for the historic buildings shall match the originals in
appearance as closely as reasonably feasible. (Mitigation Measure #5.g.)
6. Developer shall be responsible for funding a third party reviezo of the project
building permit plans and on -site oversight during the partial building
demolition of the Danville Hotel building. The third party reviewer shall be a
professional historical architect that is chosen by the Planning Division and is
acceptable to the developer. (Mitigation Measure #5.h.)
7. The design, finish and construction materials used for the second story
windows on the new western (rear) building elevation of the Danville
Hotel shall be subject to review and approval by the HDRC prior to
submittal of building plans for plan check for the proposed remodeling
of the building. In conjunction with this review, the project architect
shall report on the feasibility of relocating any of the existing windows
on portions of the building slated for demolition to this new building
elevation. The information in this report shall include documentation
as to how similar in design, materials, and construction details these
windows are to other, original windows located on the building that
are slated for retention. Information on the feasibility of retaining the
top right (southerly) second story rear window, assumed to be an
original window in the building, shall also be addressed in the report.
If HDRC's review leads to a determination that the new building
elevation cari t, or shouldn't, utilize relocated windows, the project
architect shall have the responsibility to document the efforts to be
taken to construct and install replicate windows that match, to the
extent reasonably feasible, the design, finish, and construction
materials of the original windows to be retained elsewhere on the
building.
8. The design, finish and construction materials used for any new ground
floor entry door on the new western (rear) building elevation of the
Danville Hotel shall be subject to review and approval by the HDRC
prior to submittal of building plans for plan check for the proposed
remodeling of the building. In conjunction with this review, the project
architect shall report on the feasibility of relocating an existing door (or
doors if more than one door is proposed in this location) from a portion
of the building slated for demolition to this new building elevation.
The information in this report shall include documentation as to how
similar in design, materials, and construction details the door (or
doors) are to other, original doors located on the building that are
PAGE 24 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
slated for retention. If HDRC's review leads to a determination that the
new building elevation can't, or shouldn't, utilize a relocated door (or
doors), the project architect shall have the responsibility to document
the efforts to be taken to construct and install replicate doors that
match, to the extent reasonably feasible, the design, finish, and
construction materials of the original doors to be retained elsewhere on
the building.
9. To facilitate the reviews called for in Conditions of Approval #E.7. and
#E.8. above, the developer shall open up existing interior walls of the
Danville Hotel at the location that is to become the reestablished
western exterior building wall to allow the project's third party
Historic Architect and /or HRDC, through onsite inspections, an
opportunity to determine if the historic location of doors and /or
windows for this original building elevation can be reestablished upon
the planned demolition of the non - original western portion of the
Danville Hotel. The partial interior demolition work necessary to
facilitate the review called for in this condition shall occur prior to
submittal of building plans for plan check for the proposed partial
demolition/ remodeling of the Danville Hotel.
10. The design, finish and construction materials, as well as the proposed
method of screening, of all replacement mechanical equipment and
associated vents serving future tenants in the McCauley House or the
Danville Hotel buildings, where such improvements would be
viewable by the public, shall be subject to review and approval by
HDRC prior to issuance of building permits. As part of this review, the
status of the architectural projection at the second floor area of the
south side building elevation of the Danville Hotel (between the second
floor windows on this building elevation) shall be established. If this a
non - historic architectural feature whose elimination could be provided
for through the relocation of mechanical equipment and associated
venting for the Danville Hotel, the feasibility/ desirability of such
removal shall be reported on by the project architect as part of the
HDRC review.
11. With acknowledgement that new /modified exterior building- mounted
lighting will be established following the partial demolition and
remodeling of the Danville Hotel, the project architect shall prepare
and submit a master building lighting plan for the Danville Hotel and
the McCauley House buildings for HDRC review and approval that
PAGE 25 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
provides for a coordinated and integrated exterior lighting scheme that
would provide for lighting improvements that are complimentary and
functional to the buildings and are consistent with the intent of the
Danville Historic Design Guidelines.
12. With acknowledgement that portions of the Danville Hotel are
currently in need of exterior repainting and that the new western
building elevation will be painted, the color selection for exterior
paint(s) used for the Danville Hotel shall be subject to review and
approval prior to framing inspection for the building permit for the
demolition/ remodel work of that building.
13. With acknowledgement that the exterior McCauley House was
repainted in conjunction with the most recent tenant occupancy
without the requisite review and approval of paint colors, the building
shall be repainted prior to occupancy of the replacement building
tenant with paint colors that have been reviewed and approved by
HDRC.
14. With acknowledgement that changes in tenant occupancies in the
Danville Hotel and the McCauley House buildings will occur following
completion of the scheduled construction work involving the
buildings, and in acknowledgement that exiting wall - mounted and
mini -pole freestanding signs serving existing tenants in these two
buildings did not receive a review through a Master Sign Program, the
applicant shall submit details of the proposed signage in conjunction
with the submittal to be made for Project Condition of Approval #D.10.
15. In acknowledgement that the project architectural drawings depict the
proposed use of fiber cement horizontal lapped siding for use on some
exterior areas of new construction, the project architect shall submit
details of the construction material, exterior design finish/ treatment,
and installation details of the proposed siding for review and approval
by HDRC. This review shall occur prior to submittal of building plans
for plan check for new construction. The purpose of the review shall
be to seek and secure a HDRC determination that the siding selected,
where coupled with the installation details that are to be utilized, abide
with the intent of Danville Historic Design Guideline 6.16 "Exterior
Horizontal Siding in New Construction' which states, in part,
"'(h)orizontal lap siding should be applied in a manner similar to that
seen historically ". The horizontal siding used in the project, and the
PAGE 26 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
manner it is installed, shall be such that it secures a determination from
HDRC that it has a finished appearance that "relate(s) to the lap
exposure, texture and finish of traditional wood siding."
16. In acknowledgement that the project architectural drawings depict
extensive use of brick veneer materials - particularly on the first floor
levels of the two new buildings - the project architect shall submit
details of the construction material, exterior design finish/ treatment,
and installation details of all proposed brick veneer /masonry material
for review and approval by HDRC. This review shall occur prior to
submittal of building plans for plan check for new construction. The
purpose of the review shall be to seek and secure a HDRC
determination that the brick veneer/ masonry materials selected, where
coupled with the installation details that are to be utilized, abide with
the intent of Danville Historic Design Guideline 6.17 "Brick
Veneer /Masonry in New Construction' which frames the limitations
for use of such material to where "(u)se of masonry that appears
similar in character to that seen traditionally ". The brick
veneer /masonry material used in the project, and the manner it is
installed, shall be such that it secures a determination from HDRC that
it has a finished appearance that "does not appear to be merely a
veneer. In other words, it should wrap around corners in a convincing
manner and avoid the placement of expansion joints in highly visible
areas."
17. In acknowledgement that the project architectural drawings depict use
of non - traditional materials in several areas - specifically cement fiber
board horizontal siding and the use, particularly as cornice,
stringcourse, and arch treatments, of non - traditional foam (Dryvit)-
based materials - the project architect shall submit details of these non-
traditional materials for review and approval by HDRC. This review
shall occur prior to submittal of building plans for plan check for new
construction. The purpose of the review shall be to seek and secure a
HDRC determination that the non - traditional materials selected, where
coupled with the installation details that are to be utilized, abide with
the intent of Danville Historic Design Guideline 6.17 "Non - traditional
Materials in New Construction" which states that "(o)ther non-
traditional materials are generally not appropriate, but will be
considered on a case -by -case basis." The non - traditional materials
used in the project, and the manner they are installed, shall be such that
they can secure a determination from HDRC that the product(s)
PAGE 27 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
selected, and the manner it is (they are) installed, must "appear similar
in scale, proportion, texture, and finish to those used traditionally."
18. Unless otherwise authorized by HDRC as part of their review of
architectural details, the non - historic stucco finish at the rear (western),
front (eastern), and southern side building elevations for the McCauley
Residence shall be replaced with more historically appropriate exterior
building material.
19. With the demolition of the non - original, two -story addition at the rear
of the Danville Hotel, the existing exterior stairway at the northwest
corner of the building will be removed and a replacement exterior
stairway is proposed to be constructed. The ground floor area at the
north elevation of the Danville Hotel is also non - original construction,
having been converted over time from an open air porch to a portion of
the interior seating area serving the food service use in this ground
floor tenant space. The replacement stairway will result in the removal
of one of the five existing window panels installed for the conversion of
this area to an enclosed seating area. The replacement stairway shall
use porch guards and stairway railings that replicate the design and
materials of the existing porch guards and stairway railings.
F. PARKING
1. Unless otherwise approved by the Town Council as part of the historic
preservation incentive package for this project, the developer shall be
required to pay parking in -lieu fees for project parking needs beyond
that of the pre - development condition that will be handled by
municipal parking facilities. The preliminarily estimate of enhanced
dependency on municipal parking facilities converts to a project
obligation to make in -lieu payment for slightly in excess of eighteen
parking spaces as the project parking demand on municipal parking
facilities would rise from 77.2 spaces in the pre - project condition to a 95
space dependency after project completion. The two new food service
uses in the project shall have seating limitations that in aggregate limit
indoor seating to a maximum of 170 seats and limit outdoor seating to
a maximum of 85 seats. The existing food service use (i.e., Sideboard
Restaurant) shall observe a maximum interior seat count of 48 seats
and a maximum exterior seat count of 28 seats.
2. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for the project, a Parking
Management Plan agreement for the project shall be developed and submitted
PAGE 28 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
for review and approval by the Planning Division and the Transportation
Division. Each commercial tenant occupying the project shall be provided an
executed copy of the Parking Management Plan along with their rental
agreements and each individual lessee shall submit written verification of their
awareness and acceptance of the requirements of the Plan. The Plan shall
include, at a minimum, the following provisions: (a) commitment to provide
and maintain directional signage indicating where the nearest municipal
parking facilities are located, (b) a system to monitor ongoing compliance with
the Plan; (c) a mechanism to allow changes to the Plan as may be deemed
necessary over time to meet the established goals of the Plan (with such
changes to be submitted to the Planning Division and the Transportation
Division for review and approval); (d) commitment by the property owner to
provide commute alternative information to all tenants prior to their
respective occupancies in he project, (e) a commitment by the property owner
that all reasonably feasible efforts shall be made to enforce the intent and
requirements of the Plan; (fl commitment by the property owner to require all
business owners and their employees to secure and utilize municipal parking
permits and park off -site in appropriate public parking areas as directed by the
Transportation Division and (g) a mechanism to preclude use of offsite private
parking facilities (e.g., private offsite parking on south side of Short Street) by
project business owners or their employees. (Mitigation Measure #16.a.)
* 3. All parking spaces shall be striped and provided with wheel stops
unless they are fronted by concrete curbs, in which case sufficient areas
shall be provided beyond the ends of all parking spaces to
accommodate the overhang of automobiles.
* 4. Where authorized, compact car spaces shall be clearly designated with
appropriate pavement marking. Compact spaces shall be no less than 8
feet by 16 feet in size, inclusive of allowable overhang.
5. Regulatory signage /curb painting for non - parking sections of the
interior roadways shall be provided, if deemed necessary, to the
satisfaction of the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District and the
Engineering Division.
6. All parking spaces located within the accessed - controlled residential
garage shall be maintained and utilized for their intended purpose (i.e.,
to allow the assigned parking of resident vehicles). Language shall be
included within the project CC &Rs that specifies this requirement and
establishes a mechanism for property -owner imposed fines for
residents who do not comply with this requirement.
PAGE 29 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
7. The developer shall prepare and submit a draft Truck Delivery
Management Plan for Planning Division and Transportation Division
review and approval that shall serve to regulate against unnecessary
early hour truck arrivals and deliveries that would be disruptive to
surrounding residents or create vehicular congestion.
8. The developer shall work with the Engineering Division and the
Transportation Division and the appropriate transit agency to
determine if new or alternate bus stop locations along the frontage of
the subject property are warranted with the redevelopment of this
property. If new or alternate bus stop locations are deemed warranted,
then all necessary improvements shall be the developer's responsibility
to install.
G. GRADING
1. Any grading on adjacent properties will require prior written approval
of those property owners affected.
2. At least one week prior to commencement of demolition or grading
activities, the developer shall post the site and mail to: (a) the owners of
property within 300 feet of the exterior boundary of the project site; (b)
the business owners of businesses within 300 feet of the project
boundary; and (c) the Planning Division, a notice that construction
work will be commencing at the project site. The notice shall include
the appropriate list of project contact persons, indicating name, title,
phone number and area of responsibility of such persons. The person
responsible for maintaining the list shall also be indicated on the notice.
The notice shall be kept current at all times, posting the persons with
authority to initiate corrective action in their area of responsibility. The
names of individuals responsible for dust, noise and litter control shall
be expressly identified on the notice.
3. Where geotechnical conditions encountered in grading operations and /or site
preparation zvork are different from that anticipated in the preliminary
geotechnical report or the design -level geotechnical exploration, a revised
report shall be prepared and submitted for reviezv and approval by the
Engineering Division. It shall be accompanied by an engineering and
geological opinion as to the safety of the site from settlement and seismic
activity. (Mitigation Measure #61.)
PAGE 30 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
4. All development shall comply with Danville Ordinance 2004 -06 (which
added Chapter 20 to the Danville Municipal Code relating to
Stormwater Management and Discharge Control). All development
shall also comply with the General Permit for Storm Water Discharges
Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Order No.
2009 - 0009 -DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000002), adopted by the State Water
Resources Control Board on September 2, 2009, and effective on July 1,
2010. These regulations require, among other things, that a Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) be prepared by a Qualified SWPPP
Developer for submission to the State of California via the on -line
Storm Water Multi- Application Reporting & Tracking (SMARTS)
system. No land - disturbing activity shall occur until a Notice of Intent
(NOI) is filed and a Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) number is
issued by the State of California. A copy of the NOI, including the
WDID number and attached SWPPP, shall be kept at the site at all
times, with a copy provided to the Engineering Division. The
requirements of the SWPPP and all other Permit Registration
Documents shall be fully implemented during land - disturbing
activities.
5. To adequately mitigate the shaking effects associated with a moderate to high
earthquake within the San Francisco Bay region, all project buildings shall, at
a minimum, be designed using sound engineering judgment and the 2010
California Building Code requirements. Buildings shall be designed to be able
to: (a) resist minor earthquakes without damage, (b) resist moderate
earthquakes without structural damage but with some nonstructural damage,
and (c) resist major earthquakes without collapse but with some structural as
well as nonstructural damage. Buildings shall be designed to reflect the
subject property's location within Seismic Site Class D and shall provide for
the soil profile and seismic coefficients cited in the project geotechnical report
(i.e., the Preliminary Geotechnical Report cited in Condition of Approval
#A. 1.f., above). (Mitigation Measure #6.a.)
6. Prior to submittal for project building permits, a design -level geotechnical
exploration of the subject property shall be made that shall include soil
sampling and laboratory testing for the evaluation of the expansion potential
Of soils present at the site. Mitigation measures called for in that report for
both general site improvements and for structure foundation design shall be
followed to mitigate potential impacts resulting from the presence of expansive
soils. Prior to commencing drilling activities for any soil borings associated
with the geotechnical investigation (or any environmental investigation
PAGE 31 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
and /or cleanup) a permit from the Contra Costa Environmental Health
Division shall be secured. (Mitigation Measure #6.b.)
7. The design -level geotechnical exploration shall be of a sufficient scope and
detail to document whether compressible soil layers are present at the subject
property. As dictated by the findings of that report, project foundation design
utilized in the project shall be as necessary to mitigate potential total or
differential settlement of compressible soil layers as a result of planned loading
at the surface associated with new buildings and /or fill. (Mitigation
Measure #6.c.)
8. An evaluation of the site's soil corrosion potential shall be determined through
the preparation of a soil corrosion study, which shall be integrated into the
design -level geotechnical exploration and shall be prepared by a corrosion
consultant. The soil corrosion study shall be subject to review and approval by
the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District and the Engineering Division.
As dictated by the findings of that study, site- specific design measures shall be
developed and implemented to protect buried pipelines and other
infrastructure elements against corrosion. (Mitigation Measure #6.d.)
9. If toxic or contaminated soil is encountered during construction, all
construction activity in that area shall cease until the appropriate action is
determined and implemented. The concentrations, extent of the contamination
and mitigation shall be determined by the Contra Costa County Health
Department. Suitable disposal and /or treatment of any contaminated soil shall
meet all federal, state and local regulations. If deemed appropriate by the
Health Department, the developer shall make provisions for immediate
containment of the materials. Runoff from any contaminated soil shall not be
allowed to enter any drainage facility, inlet or creek. (Mitigation Measure
#6.e.)
10. All stockpiles of debris, soil, sand or other materials that can be blown by the
wind shall be covered. (Mitigation Measure #3.b.)
11. Any abandoned wells (water, environmental, or geotechnical) and septic tanks
shall be destroyed under permit from the Contra Costa Environmental Health
Division (CCEHD). If the existence of such wells or septic tanks are known in
advance or discovered during construction or other activities, these shall be
clearly marked, kept secure, and destroyed pursuant to CCEHD requirements.
(Mitigation Measure #8.a.)
PAGE 32 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
H. STREETS
* 1. The developer shall obtain an encroachment permit from the
Engineering Division prior to commencing any construction activities
within any public right -of -way or easement.
* 2. Project street signing shall be installed by the developer, as may be
required by the Engineering Division. Traffic signs and parking
restriction signs, which may be required to be installed, shall be subject
to review and approval by the Transportation Division and the Police
Department.
3. All mud or dirt carried off the construction site onto adjacent streets shall be
szvept each day. Water flushing of site debris or sediment or concrete zvashing
is prohibited. (Mitigation Measure #9.i.)
* 4. Any damage to street improvements now existing or done during
construction on or adjacent to the subject property shall be repaired to
the satisfaction of the Engineering Division, at full expense to the
developer. This shall include slurry seal, overlay or street
reconstruction if deemed warranted by the Engineering Division.
5. All improvements within the public right -of -way, including curb,
gutter, sidewalks, driveways, paving and utilities, shall be constructed
in accordance with approved standards and/or plans and shall comply
with the standard plans and specifications of the Development Services
Department and Chapters XII and XXXI of the Danville Municipal
Code. At the time project improvement plans are submitted, the
developer shall supply to the Engineering Division an up -to -date title
report for the subject properties.
6. The roadway improvements to be installed by the developer adjoining
the property's Railroad Avenue frontage shall be substantially as
shown on Sheet TM -1 of the plans labeled "Danville Hotel Site - SUBD
9292 - Tentative Map" (as cited in Condition of Approval #A.1.a.,
above) that depict the proposed road section and frontage curb, gutter,
sidewalk and longitudinal drainage improvements. Alternate roadway
improvements for Railroad Avenue shall be reflected in project
improvement plans and shall be constructed if the Railroad Avenue
Precise Alignment Study Dated March 1985 (prepared by Santina &
Thompson Engineering) is updated by the Town to reflect a face -or-
PAGE 33 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
curb to face -of -curb road section that is narrower than exists at the time
of project approval.
* 7. Disabled access ramps shall be provided at all pedestrian street
crossing locations, as required by the Engineering Division and
pursuant to Caltrans Standard Plan RSP A88A and A88B.
8. Documentation shall be supplied to the Planning Division that a
functional shared access and maintenance agreement exits covering the
unnamed private vehicular access commonly referred to as "Short
Street ". In the absence of a current agreement, the developer shall
prepare a shared access and maintenance agreement for review and
approval of the City Attorney prior to approval of the final map. The
shared access and maintenance agreement shall include provisions for
regular sweeping of the drive aisle and respective parking areas served
by Short Street.
9. The developer shall be responsible for the installation of required
public street improvements along the site's Hartz Avenue, Prospect
Avenue, and Railroad Avenue frontages. Public improvements that
are to be the developer's responsibility to install or upgrade shall
include: pavement widening; striping and signing; fire hydrants;
electroliers; curb, gutter and necessary transverse and longitudinal
drainage improvements; a eight -foot minimum width sidewalk; border
landscaping; and necessary pavement transitions.
10. To faciliate safe pedestrian crossings to and from the project site to the
Railroad Avenue Municipal Parking Lot, the project improvement plans shall
detail changes to the design of the existing intersection of Railroad Avenue
and Short Street /northerly driveway of the Railroad Avenue Municipal
Parking Lot to provide for: (a) the creation of a four - legged intersection to
align vehicular movement, (b) the creation of bulb -outs at four corners of the
modified intersection (to shorten the pedestrian crossing distance); and (c) the
installation of in- pavement flashing amber LED unidirectional warning lights
along each side of the crosswalk spanning Railroad Avenue. The design of the
in- pavement flashing amber LED lights shall be as necessary to provide
adequate alerts to motorists approaching the intersection that they are
approaching an occupied (or soon to be occupied) crosswalk and should be
prepared to stop and yield to pedestrians. In addition to being responsible for
the cost of design for these improvements, the developer shall be responsible for
50% of the construction costs of the improvements (based on the engineer's
estimate of the work), with payment to be made prior to issuance of project
PAGE 34 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
building permits. Upon receiving Town Council approval, project - generated
Town - controlled traffic impact fees may be assigned to the developer's portion
of the project cost. (Mitigation Measure #16.b.)
11. A 40 foot long parking space on the east side of project's Railroad Avenue
frontage, near its intersection with Prospect Avenue, shall be developed and
maintained as a loading zone. The use of the loading zone shall be regulated as
directed by the Transportation Division to mitigate impacts associated with
loading and unloading of trucks serving the future mixed use project. As may
be provided for through posted use restrictions for this curbside loading zone,
it may also be used for informal passenger drop -off and pick -ups and /or for
Planning Division - approved valet parking activity serving project food service
uses during evening peak periods and /or for special functions. (Mitigation
Measure #16.c.)
12. The developer shall fund all Town costs and shall prepare all necessary
documents associated with the Town's abandonment of excess right -of-
way along Hartz Avenue, as said right -of -way is identified in the
document recorded in Book 8535 at Page 46 of Contra Costa County
official records.
13. The developer shall fund all Town costs and shall prepare all necessary
documents associated with the Town's relinquishment of those
portions of the adopted Precise Highway Setbacks on Hartz Avenue and
San Ramon Valley Boulevard between Sycamore Valley Road and Love Lane,
Danville Area that encumber the subject property. Said Precise
Highway Setbacks are identified in the document recorded in Book
5230 at Page 517 of Contra Costa County official records.
14. The developer shall fund all Town costs and shall prepare all necessary
documents associated with the Town's abandonment of excess right -of-
way, approximately 12 feet by 60 feet in area, at the northeast end of
the unnamed road known as "Short Street". The resultant
southwesterly right -of -way line for Hartz Avenue will then be straight
and continuous with no jog at the former intersection with Short Street.
I. INFRASTRUCTURE
1. Domestic water service shall be from the East Bay Municipal Utility
District (EBMUD) water system in accordance with the requirements of
the District. As indicated in EBMUD's preliminary comments on the
project (transmittals dated September 27, 2010 and March 14, 2011 ),
PAGE 35 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
developer shall submit copies of the approved development plans to
EBMUD's New Business Office to request a water service estimate to
determine the cost and conditions of providing water service to the
project. Per EBMUD comments for the project, developer is advised
that engineering and installation of water mains and meters may
require substantial lead time, which should be accounted for in the
developer's development schedule. No water meters shall be placed in
project driveways. Any proposed construction activity in the public
right -of -ways shall be coordinated with EBMUD. Relocation of
existing water pipelines may be necessary, at the developer's expense,
to assure integrity of existing water pipelines /water service delivery.
2. All wastewater shall be disposed into an existing sewer system. Sewer
disposal service shall be from the Central Contra Costa Sanitary
District sewer system in accordance with the requirements of the
District.
3. Drainage facilities and easements shall be provided to the satisfaction
of the Engineering Division.
4. All runoff from impervious surfaces shall be intercepted at the project
boundary and shall be collected and conducted via an approved
drainage method through the project to an approved storm drainage
facility in accordance with the Preliminary Stormwater Control Plan,
the C -3 Provision of the adopted Municipal Regional Permit, and as
determined by the Engineer Division. Development which proposes to
contribute additional water to existing drainage systems shall be
required to complete a hydraulic study and make improvements to the
system as required to handle the expected ultimate peak water flow
and to stabilize erosive banks that could be impacted by additional
storm water flow.
5. Unless otherwise directed through the project's approved Stromwater
Control Plan, roof drainage from buildings shall be collected via a
closed pipe and conveyed to an approved storm drainage facility in the
street curb. No concentrated drainage shall be permitted to surface
flow across sidewalks.
6. Any portion of the drainage system that conveys runoff from public
streets shall be installed within a dedicated drainage easement, or
public street.
PAGE 36 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
* 7. If a storm drain must cross a lot, or be in an easement between lots, the
easement shall be equal to or at least double the depth of the storm
drain.
* 8. The developer shall furnish proof to the Engineer Division of the
acquisition of all necessary rights of entry, permits and /or easements
for the construction of off -site temporary or permanent road and
drainage improvements.
9. The existing joint utility poles, overhead wires, and existing or new
service drops that extend along the Railroad Avenue frontage of the
developer's properties shall be placed underground in a joint trench at
the developer's cost. This may necessitate upgrades to the off -site
poles both north and south of the properties, but in no case shall new
poles be added.
* 10. All street, drainage or grading improvement plans shall be prepared by
a licensed civil engineer.
J. MISCELLANEOUS
* 1. The project shall be constructed as approved. Minor modifications in
the design, but not the use, may be approved by the Planning Division.
Any other change will require Planning Commission and /or Heritage
Resource Commission approval through submittal of a Revised Final
Development Plan application.
* 2. Pursuant to Government Code section 66474.9, the developer
(including the developer or any agent thereof) shall defend, indemnify
and hold harmless the Town of Danville and its agents, officers and
employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the Town or its
agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul, the
project approval, which action is brought within the time period
provided for in Section 66499.37. The Town will promptly notify the
developer of any such claim, action or proceeding and cooperate fully
in the defense.
3. In conjunction with the submittal for a project demolition permit and /or a
building permit, the developer shall submit a recycling plan for building and
construction materials and the disposal of green waste generated from land
clearing on the site. Prior to obtaining framing inspection approval for the
PAGE 37 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
project, the developer shall provide the Planning Division with written
documentation (e.g., receipts and records) documenting that waste materials
created from the demolition of existing buildings and the construction of new
buildings were /are being recycled according to the approved recycling plan or
in an equivalent manner. In' conjunction with observance of the approved
recycling plan, developer shall have the responsibility to document proper
recycling/disposal of fluorescent light bulbs and ballasts, security light bulbs,
electrical switches, and other demolition by- product containing mercury,
PCBs, refrigerants, etc. in accordance with applicable regulations. As
appropriate, a California licensed hazardous waste hauler shall conduct
transportation of these items from the site. (Mitigation Measure #8.c.)
4. Use of a private gated vehicular entrance for the at -grade structured
parking that is to serve the residential units in the project is authorized
by this approval. The gate shall be maintained in good working order,
with that maintenance to include actions necessary to keep the gate's
operational noise levels at the intended design standard cited by the
gate manufacturer.
5. The location, design and number of gang mailbox structures serving
the residential portion of the project shall be subject to review and
approval by the Planning Division and the local Postmaster.
6. The project shall comply with both the treatment and flow control guidelines
set forth by the 2009 Municipal Regional Permit (MRP) C.3. Requirements
issued by the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board. Since the
project will alter more than 50% of the pre - project impervious surfaces present
at the subject property, and since existing site improvements do not include
stormwater treatment measures, the project shall provide stormwater
treatment measures for the entire site (with this obligation to be inclusive of
treatment for impervious surfaces present in abutting public right -of -way
areas that will be removed in conjunction with the project's construction).
Since the subject property is over one acre in size and since the project will
increase the amount of impervious surface area from current totals, the project
shall abide to hydrograph modification management (i.e., flow control)
requirements of the MRP. Pursuant to the MRP, the existing developed site
conditions shall be used as a baseline for the determination of the pre- and
post - project runoff conditions and to define the required volume of the flow
control facilities. Project compliance with its hydro - modification requirements
shall be through the construction and maintenance of Engineering Division -
approved stormwater detention /retention facilities. (Mitigation Measure
#9.a.)
PAGE 38 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
7. A final Stormwater Control Plan (SCP) that defines all Drainage
Management Areas (DMAs) and related Integrated Management Practices
(IMPS) shall be submitted for review and approval by the Engineering
Division prior to issuance of grading or building permits for the project. The
SCP shall be substantially consistent with the Preliminary Stormwater
Control Plan cited in Project Condition of Approval #A.1.e., above. All C.3
stormwater facilities detailed in the SCP shall conform in size and dimension
to the minimum requirements contained the Contra Costa Clean Water
Program Stormwater C.3 Guidebook in place at the time application in made
for project grading or building permits. All final construction, architecture,
landscaping and improvement plan details prepared for the project shall
conform to the approved final SCP. Unless otherwise authorized by the
Engineering Division, the SCP shall be submitted for review and approval
prior to submittal of the project improvement plans or grading plans to verify
that all DMAs are properly described, sized, and located. (Mitigation
Measure #9.b.)
8. A Stormwater Facilities Operation and Maintenance Plan, consistent with the
project's SCP and applicable Contra Costa Clean Water Program instructions,
shall be submitted for review and approval by the Engineering Division prior
to approval of the initial frame inspection for a project building permit. The
approved Stormwater Facilities Operation and Maintenance Plan shall be
executed and recorded prior approval of the initial final inspection for a project
building permit. (Mitigation Measure #9.c.)
9. The project's Prelminary Stormwater Control Plan (refer to Condition of
Approval #A.1.f., above) indicates that a portion of the project C.3. treatment
requirements are proposed to be met by the construction offsite treatment -only
improvements and /or by payment of an in -lieu fee. Pursuit of the in -lieu fee
option for that portion of the C.3 treatment requirements not handled on the
subject property may only be utilized if approved by the Town Council prior to
issuance of project grading permit. (Mitigation Measure #9.d.)
10. The SCP shall include final calculations and designs for both the planned
onsite and offsite IMPS. The SCP shall include page cross - references to all
related architectural, landscaping and improvement plan construction details
for both onsite and offsite improvements. (Mitigation Measure #9.e.)
11. The location and general design of any proposed offsite IMPS serving the
project shall be subject to review and approval by the Engineering Division
prior to approval of the SCP and approval of any final construction drawings.
(Mitigation Measure #91.)
PAGE 39 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
12. Prior to issuance of grading or building permits for the project, the developer,
project general contractor, and appropriate project sub - contractors shall attend
a pre - construction meeting with the assigned Engineering Division and
Stormwater inspection staff to discuss the project SCP and related IMPS and
to discuss the inspection process to be used to assure IMPS are installed
consistent with the SCP. (Mitigation Measure #9.g.)
13. Written Engineering Division or Stormwater Program inspection staff sign -
offs shall be secured for construction and installation of all project IMPS, with
IMPS inspections observing the following minimum inspection sequence: a)
layout inspection (required prior to beginning project excavation); b)
excavation inspection (required prior to backfilling IMPS with any material or
pipe installation); c) overflow inlet /surface connection to storm drain system
inspection (required prior to backfilling IMPs with any material); d)
underground connection to storm drain outlet or orifice inspection (required
prior to backfilling IMPs with any material); e) drain rock /sub -drain
inspection (required prior to soil media mix inspection /test and installation); J)
soil media mix inspection /test (required prior to soil media installation); g) soil
media installation inspection (required prior to irrigation installation); h)
irrigation inspection (required prior to plant material installation); i) planting
inspection (required prior to final Engineering Division Inspection); and j)
Engineering Division Final (required prior to building permit final). The
developer shall utilize the inspection log provided by the Engineering Division
at the pre - construction meeting. (Mitigation Measure #9.h.)
14. All exhaust systems for restaurants, coffee houses and other food service uses
established within the commercial portion of the project shall be fitted with air
cleaning systems to reduce smoke and odors emanating from these uses to an
efficiency level of 95-99% by particle count, or as otherwise determined
acceptable by the Development Services Department. If alternate treatment of
food service- generated smoke and /or odor is sought by the developer, the
proposed method of treatment shall be subject to review and approval by the
Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits for tenant
improvements for affected tenant spaces in the project. (Mitigation
Measure #3.c.)
15. A minimum of 15% of the project residential units in the project shall
be made available to low- or moderate - income households, with not
less than 40% of those units available to very low- income households.
[Note: If the Community Development Agency of the Town of Danville
(Agency) is not in existence at the time building permits or final map
approval for the project is sought, the above - stated Community
PAGE 40 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
Redevelopment Law inclusionary housing obligation will be
supplanted by the Inclusionary Housing for Affordable Residential
Housing requirements set forth in the Danville Municipal Code, which
still call for a minimum of 15% of the project units as affordable units
but shift the target households to be served to be moderate - income
households earning a maximum of 110% of median income for the
Contra Costa/ Alameda County Area.] The developer shall enter into a
formal agreement which specifies the maximum income of the buyers,
regulates the terms of occupancy, resale or any other restriction
deemed necessary to assure the long term affordability of the units to
the target households. This agreement shall be subject to approval by
the Agency (or the Town Council if the Agency is no longer in
existence) prior to recordation of the final map or issuance of building
permits for new building construction. At the discretion of the
Agency, the project's CRL inclusionary requirement to provide
affordable units may be satisfied by residential units outside the
boundary of the Community Development Area on a two- for -one
basis.
16. In case the residential portion of the project is built as, or converted to,
individually owned condominium units, an Owner's Association shall
be formed. The Owner's Association, through project- specific
covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC &Rs), shall be responsible for
commonly owned facilities. The CC &Rs shall include appropriate
restrictions relating to the use of project parking and storage to meet
the intent and requirements of these conditions of approval. Draft
CC &Rs shall be submitted to the Planning Division and City Attorney
for review and approval a minimum of 60 days prior to the individual
sale of any of the units. A note shall be placed on the final map for this
project which specifies the requirement that the City Attorney shall
have review and approval authority of project- specific CC &Rs prior to
the individual sale of any of the units.
17. Prior to any demolition and /or re- modeling activity involving existing
buildings on the subject property, an Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response
Act (AHERA) Asbestos Containing Materials site inspection shall be
conducted, zvith samples obtained from suspect materials and analysis by a
state - certified lab to ascertain zvhat, if any, asbestos containing materials
(ACM) is present in the onsite buildings. Recommendations of such report
shall be follozved to the satisfaction of the Building Division to address any
ACM found at the project site. (Mitigation Measure #7.a.)
PAGE 41 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
18. Prior to any demolition and /or re- modeling activity involving existing
buildings on the subject property, a Lead -based paint site inspection shall be
conducted, with samples obtained from suspect materials and analysis by a
state - certified lab to ascertain what, if any, lead -based paint (IMP) material is
present in the onsite buildings. Recommendations of such report shall be
followed to the satisfaction of the Building Division to address any LMP found
at the project site. (Mitigation Measure #7.b.)
19. If the ACM report determines there are ACMs present, the developer shall
have the responsibility to: (a) remove and dispose all ACM in accordance with
applicable Federal, State and local regulations governing asbestos including,
but not limited to those promulgated by OSHA, EPA, Cal -OSHA, Cal -DPH,
DTSC, and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District Developer
( BAAQMD); (b) supply notification to employees, contractors,
subcontractors, and tenants having access to the buildings on the subject
property as to the presence, location, and quantity of ACMs documented to be
present at the site, with such notification to occur within 15 days of receiving
such information; (c) retention of a State of California licensed and Cal -OSHA
registered asbestos contractor to complete the recommended pre - demolition
abatement of all ACM at the site; (d) provision of a 10 working day minimum
advanced written notification to BAAQMD prior to demolition activities
(with said notice to be accompanied by payment of requisite administrative
fees); and (e) provision of an "Intent to Conduct ACM Related Work"
notification to Cal -OSHA. (Mitigation Measure #7.c.)
20. If the LBP report determines there are LBPs present, the developer shall have
the responsibility to: (a) remove and dispose all LBPs in accordance with
applicable Federal, State and local regulations; (b) advise contactors engaged
in work at the site that LBPs are present and that said LBPs shall only be
impacted by properly trained workers, using appropriate lead - related work
practices in compliance with applicable Cal -OSHA worker exposure
regulations; and (c) provision of an "Intent to Conduct Lead Related Work"
notification to Cal -OSHA. (Mitigation Measure #7.d.)
21. In recognition of the project's location within the San Ramon Creek watershed
and Drainage Area 10 of the Contra Costa County Flood Control & Water
Conservation District (FC District), the project shall make payment of
appropriate drainage fees respectively being a $0.10 per square foot of net new
impervious surface area drainage fee for the San Ramon Creek watershed
(based on the FC District's standard impervious surface area ordinance) and a
drainage fee consistent with FC District Ordinance No. 92 -52 for the
Drainage Area 10 watershed. (Mitigation Measure #8.b.)
PAGE 42 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
22. The developer shall grant to the Town an easement for pedestrian use
by the public across portions of the contiguous sidewalk that extend
onto the developer's private property at the East Prospect Avenue and
Hartz Avenue frontages. The existence of said easement shall in no
way nullify or supersede Municipal Code X12 -6 "Maintenance and
Repair of Sidewalks" that imposes upon the present or future property
owner the affirmative duty to repair and maintain the sidewalk area in
a safe and non - dangerous condition. Use of the easement area for uses
other than pedestrian access shall be subject to a discretionary land use
permit planning entitlement request. Application for said permit shall
be made to the Planning Division.
23. Any reconfiguration of the existing easement and right -of -way
reserved for utility purposes across the unnamed road commonly
referred to as "Short Street" shall be subject to the review and approval
of those entities that own and maintain existing facilities within said
easement area. The reservation for said easement is identified in the
document recorded in Book 7336 at Page 585 of Contra Costa County
official records. If any owner of existing facilities objects to the
reconfiguration of the easement, then improvements proposed within
the easement area shall be redesigned such that the reconfiguration is
no longer necessary.
24. Any private surface improvement that encroaches into the public right -
of -way (e.g., landscape planters, fences, building elements) shall be
subject to a License Agreement between the property owner and the
Town that runs with the land. Said agreement shall transfer the
liability and maintenance responsibility for said improvement to the
property owner and shall require the removal of said improvement by
the property owner upon 60 -days written notice given by the Town.
25. At no time during normal business hours shall safe and convenient
vehicle/ pedestrian access be restricted into or out of the adjoining
parking area that serves the businesses (currently Fremont Bank and
Molly's Pup- Purr -Ee) on the southeast side of the unnamed road
commonly referred to as "Short Street ".
26. Except as may be specifically provided for through subsequent review
and approvals by the Design Review Board of the project's Final
Landscape Plan, the design of streetscape improvements along the
public right -of -way frontages of the subject property shall be governed
PAGE 43 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
by the Town's adopted Old Tozon Beautification Plan (February 1990).
According to the plan, the frontages are designated as follows:
Except as may be provided for through subsequent DRB reviews and
approvals, the dimensions, configuration, and standards for the
various streetscape design elements shall be consistent with the
adopted plan for each zone. Said design elements include brick -
banding for the sidewalks, street trees /wells, the street lights, and any
installed street furniture. These are minimum standards that may
become more prescriptive as a result of review and final approval by
the DRB and /or Historic Design Review Committee (HDRC). All
installed or replaced public street lighting shall have light - emitting
diode (LED) lamps. The developer shall work with Pacific Gas &
Electric on the Town's behalf to establish a rate schedule for these street
lights that accounts for the savings in electricity inherent in LED lamps
as compared to traditional lamps.
27. If a final map is not recorded prior to the issuance of building permits
for new construction, the developer shall record the requisite lot
merger(s) to assure existing property lines are not crossed by new
construction or create exceptions to building setback requirements set
forth by building regulations.
PAGE 44 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
Sidewalk
Street
Zone
Brick Banding
Street Tree
Tree Well
Street Light
Hartz
1
2' -wide (Triple
Aristocrat
4'- square
Type 2 (Antique
Ave.
Row Bricks)
Pear
w/2 luminaires &
banner mount)
Prospect
3
2' -wide (Triple
Pistache
3'- square
Type 1 (Antique
Ave.
Row Bricks)
w/1 luminaire)
Railroad
4
None
Scarlett
4'- square
Traditionaire w/2
Ave.
Oak
luminaires
Except as may be provided for through subsequent DRB reviews and
approvals, the dimensions, configuration, and standards for the
various streetscape design elements shall be consistent with the
adopted plan for each zone. Said design elements include brick -
banding for the sidewalks, street trees /wells, the street lights, and any
installed street furniture. These are minimum standards that may
become more prescriptive as a result of review and final approval by
the DRB and /or Historic Design Review Committee (HDRC). All
installed or replaced public street lighting shall have light - emitting
diode (LED) lamps. The developer shall work with Pacific Gas &
Electric on the Town's behalf to establish a rate schedule for these street
lights that accounts for the savings in electricity inherent in LED lamps
as compared to traditional lamps.
27. If a final map is not recorded prior to the issuance of building permits
for new construction, the developer shall record the requisite lot
merger(s) to assure existing property lines are not crossed by new
construction or create exceptions to building setback requirements set
forth by building regulations.
PAGE 44 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05
APPROVED by the Danville Planning Commission at a special joint meeting with
the Planning Commission on March 22, 2011, by the following vote:
AYES: Attwood, Combs, Graham, Morgan, Nichols,
NOES: - /I /
ABSENT: Bock - Willmes
ABSTAIN: -
RMAN
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY CHIEF F
, Radich
PAGE 45 OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-05