Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCD 23 Meyer RoadSAN RAFAEL THE CITY WITH A MISSION Agenda Item No: 5.a Meeting Date: September 18, 2017 SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Department: Community Development Prepared by: Paul Jensen (SS) City Manager Approval: Community Development Director TOPIC: NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 23 MEYER ROAD SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW, 3,570 SQ. FT. SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE AND ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS (DRIVEWAY, RETAINING WALLS, DRAINAGE AND LANDSCAPING) ON A VACANT 94,857 SQ. FT. (2.18 -ACRE), HILLSIDE AND RIDGELINE LOT. THE PROJECT ALSO REQUESTS AN EXCEPTION FROM THE PROHIBITION TO RIDGELINE DEVELOPMENT. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council adopt the attached Resolution (Exhibit 1) conditionally approving an Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED15-027) and Exception (EX17-007). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The project proposes the development of a new, two story, single family home, on a vacant hillside and ridgeline lot located on Meyer Road, east of Wolf Grade. The proposed project was reviewed by the Design Review Board (Board) on two occasions, first as a Conceptual Review and second as formal application. The Board unanimously recommended conditional approval of the project on February 7, 2017. On July 11, 2017, the Planning Commission (Commission) reviewed and recommended approval of the project, subject to larger planting sizes throughout the landscape plan. Since the entire site is located within 100 vertical feet of a requires the grantir Commission and t development on thi which the Planning met by the project. File No.: 10-2 of an Exception by the City Council, \A ie Design Review Board. In this case, s ridgeline would preclude all reasonable Commission and Design Review Board c Council Meeting: 09/18/2017 Disposition: Resolution 14394 visually significant ridgeline, the project th the recommendation by the Planning findings can be made that prohibiting economic use of the site. Staff finds, to oncur, that these Exception findings are FOR CITY CLERK ONLY SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 2 BACKGROUND: History: On April 3, 2013, a Conditional Certificate of Compliance (CC12-001) was issued by the Public Works Director determining the parcel to be a legal lot of record, subject to required improvements to Meyer Road as determined by the Public Works Department. On November 18, 2014, the Design Review Board completed a Conceptual Review (CDR14- 008) of the proposed project. The Board provided a number of comments and recommendations including, among others: a) redesign the access driveway to relocate the `guest' parking area; b) reduce the height of the retaining wall to comply with the hillside guidelines (3' height downslope of residence; 4' height upslope of residence) by stepping back or breaking up retaining walls into series of wall structures; and c) take advantage of the allowable "setback waiver" to encroach into the front setback 10' with the residence and access driveway The meeting can be viewed here. On February 7, 2017, the Design Review Board completed a formal review of the project application and unanimously recommended approval of the proposed site and building design (4-0-2; Members Kent and Lentini absent). The Board found the residence design and improvements to be appropriate for the hillside site and ridgeline location. The Board commented that the proposed residence is modest in size for the size of the parcel and suggested that a fourth bathroom be added. The meeting can be viewed here. On July 11, 2017, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this project. The Commission reviewed and unanimously recommended approval of the project to the City Council, including the Exception to ridgeline development (6-0-1; Loughran absent). The Planning Commission conditioned this action subject to a number of modifications. The complete staff report from this Planning Commission meeting, including additional details and analysis, can be found here. This meeting can be viewed here. Project Description: Use: The project proposes to construct a new 3,570 sq. ft., multi -story, single-family residence and associated site development or improvements, including landscape and drainage improvements and concrete driveway access from Meyer Road. The project requests an Exception to the prohibition on development within 100 vertical feet of a ridgeline. Site Plan: The new single-family residence and driveway are proposed to be located, generally, along the Meyer Rd. frontage. Both the site and the proposed project are located within 100 vertical feet of a significant ridgeline. Vehicular access to the building site is proposed through a new driveway located at the northeast corner of the site, immediately west of an existing natural storm water drainage swale, and continuing west along the existing slope contours. The new driveway would be, generally, 18' -wide and widen to 18-70' at turnaround and parking areas, located approximately midway up the driveway. The driveway is proposed with a maximum grade of up to 18%. The project proposes to locate the new garage at the top of the driveway, 15' setback or upslope from the roadway easement/required front setback on the site. The project proposes to `step -back' the remainder of the residence, locating the first floor of the residence 4 — 5' setback or upslope from the garage floor and the second floor of the new residence 14' setback from the garage floor. SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 3 Retaining walls up to 12' in height are proposed downslope of the driveway, primarily to create the turnaround `and uncovered parallel parking space areas, all located outside the required 20' roadway easement/front yard setback. Two, generally equal height retaining walls up to 6' -tall are proposed upslope of the driveway, the upper retaining wall setback approximately 3' 3" from the lower retaining wall. The retaining walls downslope of the driveway are proposed to be poured -concrete while those located upslope of the driveway are proposed to be blown-Shotcrete. Both are proposed to be integral - colored in dark gray. Two uncovered patio areas are proposed along the west elevation totaling 256 sq. ft. in area. The project also proposes to create a triangular-shaped, 23,600 sq. ft. (approx.) private conservation easement area at the southwest corner of the site, which would incorporate the portion of the significant ridgeline within the site boundaries. Wood trellis arch treatments, 8' in height, lead to separate pedestrian staircases which connect both the main entrance and the patio areas to Meyer Rd. Architecture: The project proposes a multi -story design for the new residence which would be `cut' into the hillside in order to comply with the maximum allowable building height for the site. The project design proposes, primarily a `hipped' roof form with a low -to -moderate pitch (4%in-12") to flowing the natural slope of the site. Small gabled roofs projections provide building articulation along the frontage and at the entry to the residence. Proposed exterior materials and colors include a stone veneer wainscot, two-tone stucco finish base color, trim color and composite asphalt roof shingles, all in a medium taupe - dark brown earthtone/woodtone color palette. The project proposes a secondary trim color, a medium red color on the window sills. Landscaping: The project proposes to remove a total of 35 existing trees on the site prior to grading and construction activities. Most of these trees requiring removal are California bay trees though one (1) tree is a Coast Live oak. Most trees proposed for removal have been deemed in an Arborist Report for the project to be in poor health and/or form. The proposed Landscape Plan for the project includes 16, 15 -gallon size replacement trees, all of which are California native ornamental species. Grading/Drainage: The project will require approximately 610 cubic yards (CYDS) of total site grading: 580 CYDS of `cut' and 30 CYDS of `fill' with 550 CYDS of `off -haul'. The site is currently served, and will continue to be served, by a network of open drainage ditches and culverted storm water drainage system. The project proposes to install two (2) engineered linear storm water dissipater structures, both located downslope of the proposed new residence and driveway and Meyer Rd. One storm water dissipater is proposed to be 30' in length and located adjacent to the driveway and the other storm water dissipater is proposed to be 65' in length and located adjacent to the new residence. Reduced -size plans are provided as Exhibit 2. Material and color boards will be available for review at the City Council hearing. ANALYSIS: San Rafael General Plan 2020 Consistency: The project has been reviewed by staff for consistency with all applicable San Rafael General Plan 2020 policies, a complete analysis of which is provided in Exhibit 4 (General Plan Consistencv Table) to the Planning Commission staff report (July 11, 2017). Staff finds that the project, as conditioned, would SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 4 be consistent with all applicable General Plan policies related to Land Use, Housing, Neighborhoods, Community Design, Circulation, Infrastructure, Sustainability, Safety, Noise, and Air and Water Quality. Zoning Ordinance Consistency: The site is located within the Single -Family Residential — Hillside Development Overly (R1a-H) District. The project has been reviewed by staff for consistency with all applicable development standards for the R1 a -H District, a complete analysis of which is provided in Exhibit 5 (Zoning Ordinance Consistencv Table) to the Planning Commission staff report (July 11, 2017). As designed, the project complies with all applicable property development standards for the R1 a -H District, subject to the granting of an Exception to the prohibition on ridgeline development. Ridgeline Development - Exception: Development of new structures within 100' vertical feet of a visually significant ridgeline is prohibited unless an Exception is granted by the City Council, with the recommendation by the Commission and the Board, and findings made that the prohibition to ridgeline development precludes all reasonable economic use of the site. Required findings are contained in Zoning Ordinance Section 14.12.030.E. Staff finds, to which the Commission and the Board concur, that these required Exception findings, listed below in bold followed by staff's analysis, are met: 1. There are no site development alternatives which avoid ridgeline development. There are no site development alternatives which avoid ridgeline development, given that; the entire site is located within 100 vertical feet of the ridgeline; no alternative location on the site exists which would not require the granting of the Exception to ridgeline development on the site. Furthermore, the proposed development is sited at the lowest portion of the lot, thus minimizing it's impact; 2. The density has been reduced to the minimum allowed by the General Plan land use desiqnation densitv range. The density has been reduce to the minimum allowed by the General Plan land use designation density range, given that; the site has a General Plan land use designation of Hillside Residential (HR), which allows 0.5-2 units of gross density per acre and is consistent with the one (1) residential unit proposed by the project on the site; 3. No new subdivision lots are created which will result in ridqeline development. No new subdivision lots are created which will result in ridgeline development, given that; the project does not propose to subdivide the site and the site is ineligible for subdivision under the City's currently adopted Subdivision Ordinance. The site is 94,857 sq. ft. in area, slightly over 2 acres. Pursuant to Section 15.07.020(a) of the Subdivision Ordinance, any subdivision of the site would need to create parcels with a minimum lot size of 2 acres, based on the HR General Plan land use designation and the 46.7% average cross -slope; and 4. The proposed development will not have significant adverse visual impacts due to modifications for height, bulk design, size, location, sitinq and landscaping, which avoid or minimize the visual impacts of the development, as viewed from all public viewing areas. The proposed development will not have significant adverse visual impacts due to modifications for height, bulk design, size, location, siting and landscaping, which avoid or minimize the visual impacts of the development, as viewed from all public viewing areas, given that; the intent of the City's adopted hillside development standards and design guidelines is to reduce adverse visual impacts and adherence to these applicable standards and guidelines will reduce project impacts as much as possible. To reduce perceived bulk and mass on hillsides, new development on the site should both preserve as much existing landscape screening as possible and augment with additional landscape screening, should be located as close as possible to the Meyer Rd. SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 5 frontage and should step up with the existing natural slope. As currently proposed, the new residence would not project above the ridgeline on the site and potential public views of the natural ridge tree silhouette would not be interrupted. The applicant has installed story poles to help demonstrate the scale and height or visual impacts of the project, representing the exterior wall heights at the corners of the new residential structure and the roof ridge. At its February 7, 2017 meeting, the Design Review Board unanimously recommended approval of the proposed building and site design with minor modifications. Parking Requirements: The project is required to provide two (2) `covered' on-site parking spaces and two (2) additional `covered' or `uncovered' on-site parking spaces due to its hillside location. The project proposes two (2) `garage' on-site parking spaces and two (2) `uncovered' parallel parking spaces, located approximately midway up the driveway. In addition, staff finds the project also is consistent with minimum garage dimensions, minimum uncovered parking space dimensions, and minimum driveway width and maximum driveway grade or slope. Review Criteria — Environmental and Design Review Permits: The project has been reviewed by staff for consistency with all applicable review criteria for Environmental and Design Review Permits, a complete analysis of which is provided in Exhibit 5 (Zoning Ordinance Consistencv Table) to the Planning Commission staff report (July 11, 2017). The review criteria for Environmental and Design Review Permits seek to have the proposed design (architecture, form, scale, materials and color, etc.) of all new development `relate' to the predominant design or `character -defining' design elements existing in the vicinity. As designed, the project generally complies with all applicable review criteria. Staff finds the multi -story scale proposed by the project design is well established in the surrounding neighborhood. The natural landscaping is preserved in its natural state by minimizing grading and tree removal; new landscaping is an integral enhancement to the site, water -efficient design and sensitive to the natural state of the site. Story poles have been installed on the site by the applicant to help demonstrate the scale and height of the project, representing the exterior wall heights at the corners of the new residential structure, the roof ridge and the driveway retaining walls, which is provided in Exhibit 8 (Story Pole Staking Plan; Sh. SP1) to the Planning Commission staff report. The applicant has submitted several colors and materials boards, proposing a diverse color palette of generally medium -to -dark shades of taupe and browns, which will be available at the Council meeting upon request. For a more detailed analysis on the project's consistency with all applicable General Plan policies, development standards and requirements, and review criteria for Environmental and Design Review Permits, the Council is invited review the Julv 11, 2017 Planning Commission staff report. COMMUNITY OUTREACH: The project review has included three (3) public meetings before the Planning Commission and Design Review Board. Actual video proceedings from all meetings may be reviewed at the City's website at http://www.citvofsanrafael.ora/meetinqs/ and navigating to the hearing body and meeting date under archived video section. Notice of all public hearings on the project, including this City Council meeting, has been conducted in accordance with the public review period and noticing requirements contained in Chapter 29 of the Zoning Ordinance. All notices of public meeting or hearing on the project were mailed to all property owners and occupants within a 300 -foot radius of the site and the representing neighborhood groups (Gerstle Park Neighborhood Association and the Southern Heights Homeowners' Association) at least SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 6 15 days prior to each meeting or hearing. In addition, notice of each meeting or hearing was posted at the site, along the Meyer Rd. frontage, at least 15 days prior to each meeting or hearing All public comments on the project received by staff prior to the Design Review Board and Planning Commission meetings are attached to the Julv 11, 2017 Planning Commission staff report. Generally, the biggest concern of the surrounding neighbors is how the proposed grading and construction activities on the site will impact them. Staff's response is that the project approvals include a condition (Condition 18; Exhibit 1) which requires the applicant to submit a comprehensive construction management plan (CMP) to staff for review and approval with the recommendation of the City Engineer. The intent of this CMP would be to eliminate potential safety issues and to reduce or minimize all other impacts during approved grading and construction activities on the site. Staff has received no comments prior to this City Council meeting. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: As required by state law, the project's potential environmental impacts have been assessed. Construction of one (1) single-family residence on a legal parcel, such as proposed by the project, is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to Section 15303 (a) (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines. FISCAL IMPACT: The project involves a private development and the application process, which is privately financed. There would be no direct fiscal impact on the City budget, given that its review is subject to cost recovery fees paid by the applicant. The project would generate four (4) new peak hour vehicle trips, which would be subject to the payment of a Traffic Mitigation Fee of $16,984 (4 x $4,246/new peak hour traffic trip) to assist in funding needed off-site transportation improvements. All utility connections (sewer, water, gas/electric) will be constructed at the cost of the property owner. Further, all public improvements along the site frontage (Meyer Road) will be constructed at the cost of the property owner. Once constructed, the development would generate additional property tax for the City of San Rafael, based on one -percent (1 %) of its assessed value. OPTIONS: The City Council has the following options: 1. Adopt the Resolution conditionally approving the project (staff recommendation). 2. Adopt the Resolution conditionally approving the project with modifications or additions to the conditions of approval. 3. Continue the matter and direct staff to return with additional information to address any comments or concerns of the Council. 4. Direct staff to return with a revised Resolution denying the project. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt a resolution (Attachment 1) conditionally approving an Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED15-027) and Exception (EX17-007) to allow the construction of a new two-story, 3,570 sq. ft., single-family residence and associated site improvements (driveway, retaining walls, drainage and landscaping) on a vacant, 94,857 sq. ft., hillside within 100 feet of a ridgeline. SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Paae: 7 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Resolution Conditionally Approving Environmental and Design Review Permit No. (ED15-027) and Exception No. (EX17-007) 2. Project Plans RESOLUTION NO. 14394 RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL CONDITIONALLY APPROVING ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT (ED15-027) AND AN EXCEPTION (EX17-007) TO THE PROHIBITION ON RIDGELINE DEVELOPMENT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW, 3,570 SQ.FT., MULTI -STORY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE AND ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS (DRIVEWAY, RETAINING WALLS, DRAINAGE AND LANDSCAPING) ON A VACANT 94,857 SQ. FT. (2.18 ACRES) HILLSIDE AND RIDGELINE PARCEL, LOCATED AT 23 MEYER RD. (APN: 015-291-15) WHEREAS, on April 3, 2013, a Conditional Certificate of Compliance (CC12-001) was issued by the Public Works Director determining the project site to be a legal lot of record, subject to required improvements to Meyer Road as determined by the Public Works Department; and WHEREAS, on August 28, 2013, staff completed Pre -application (PA13-007) review on the proposed project and provided comments to the applicant; and WHEREAS, on November 18, 2014, the City of San Rafael Design Review Board (Board) completed a Conceptual Design (CDR14-008) of the proposed project and provided a number of comments including recommended design changes; and WHEREAS, on March 30, 2015, a formal project application for an Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED15-027) was submitted to the Community Development Department, Planning Division, proposing to construct a 3,156 sq. ft., multi -story single-family residence and associated site improvements (driveway, retaining walls, drainage and landscaping) on a vacant 94,857 sq. ft. hillside and ridgeline parcel, subsequently assigned the address of 23 Meyer Rd.; and WHEREAS, the project application also requests an Exception (EX17-007) to the prohibition on development located within 100 vertical feet of a ridgeline; and WHEREAS, a request for an Exception to ridgeline development may be granted only upon the adoption of the following required findings: 1) There are no site development alternatives which avoid ridgeline development; 2) The density has been reduced to the minimum allowed by the General Plan land use designation density range; 3) No new subdivision lots are created which will result in ridgeline development; and 4) The proposed development will not have significant adverse visual impacts due to modifications for height, bulk design, size, location, siting and landscaping, which avoid or minimize the visual impacts of the development, as viewed from all public viewing areas; and WHEREAS, on February 7, 2017, the Board reviewed the project design and unanimously recommended approval (4-0-2; Kent and Lentini absent) of the proposed site and building design, finding the design to be appropriate for the site and ridgeline location. The Board included a number of design recommendations in its action; and WHEREAS, in response to the Board's comments, the project design was subsequently revised; and WHEREAS, on July 11, 2017, the City of San Rafael Planning Commission (Commission) held a duly -noticed hearing to consider the Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED15-027) and Exception (EX17-007) applications, accepted and considered all oral and written public testimony and the written report by Community Development Department Planning staff; and WHEREAS, on July 11, 2017, the Commission adopted Resolution No. 17-03 (6-0-1; Commissioner Loughran absent) recommending that the City of San Rafael City Council (City Council) conditionally approve the Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED15-027) and Exception (EX17-007) applications, subject to the additional condition that all new plantings on the site increase in container size; and WHEREAS, in response to the Commission's requirement, the project's landscape plan has been subsequently revised, to incorporate the Planning Commission recommendations; and WHEREAS, on September 18, 2017, the City Council held a duly -noticed public hearing on the proposed project, including Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED15-027) and Exception (EX17-007) applications, accepting all oral and written public testimony and the written report by the Community Development Department Planning staff and closed said hearing on that date; and WHEREAS, the custodian of documents which constitute the record of proceedings upon which this decision is based is the Community Development Department; and WHEREAS, the City of San Rafael City Council does hereby make the following findings related to Environmental and Design Review Permit No. ED15-027 and Exception No. EX17- 007: Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED15-027) Findings A. As documented in the General Plan 2020 Consistency Table (Exhibit 4 of the July 11, 2017 Planning Commission staff report, the project design is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance, and the purposes of Chapter 14.25 of the Zoning Ordinance; in that: As documented in the General Plan 2020 Consistency Table attached to the staff report to the Planning Commission, the project will be consistent with Land Use Policies LU -2 (Development Timing), LU -8 (Density of Residential Development), LU -12 (Building Heights) and LU -23 (Land Use Map and Categories), Housing Policy H-2 (Housing That Fits into the Neighborhood Context), Neighborhoods Policy NH -2 (New Development in Residential Neighborhoods), Community Design Policies CD -1d (City Image; Landscape Improvement), CD -2 (Neighborhood Identity), CD -3 (Neighborhoods), CD -5 (Views), CD - 13 (Single -Family Residential Design Guidelines), CD -15 (Participation in Project Review), CD -18 (Landscaping) and CD -19 (Lighting), Circulation Policy C-7 (Circulation Improvement Funding), Infrastructure Policy 1-2 (Adequacy of Infrastructure and Services), Sustainability Policies SU -5 (Reduce Use of Non -Renewable Resources) and SU -6 (New and Existing Trees), Safety Policies S-1 (Location of Future Development), S-3 (Use of Hazard Maps in Development Review), S-4 (Geotechnical Review), S-6 (Seismic Safety of New Buildings), S-18 (Storm Drainage Improvements), S-22 (Erosion) and S-32 (Safety Review of Development Projects), Noise Policies N-3 (Planning and Design of New Development) and N -10b (Nuisance Noise; Mitigation for Construction Activity Noise), and Air and Water Polices AW -7 (Local, State and Federal Standards) and AW -8 (Reduce Pollution from Urban Runoff); and 2. As documented in the Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table (Exhibit 5 of the Julv 11, 2017 Planninq Commission staff report), the proposed project will be consistent with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance, which is to promote and protect the public health safety, peace, comfort and general welfare, given that: a. The proposed project will implement and promote the goals and policies of the San Rafael General Plan 2020, as identified in Finding Al above; b. The project will reduce or remove negative impacts caused by inappropriate location, use or design of buildings and improvements, given that; 1) The project is proposed to be consistent with all applicable development standards and design criteria and guidelines in both the R1 a District zone and the Hillside Development Overlay (-H) District; and 2) The Design Review Board (Board) has reviewed the proposed project and unanimously (4-0-2; Kent and Lentini absent) recommended approval of the site and building design, subject to minor improvements which have been incorporated in revised plans for review by the Planning Commission; c. The project will ensure the adequate provision of light, air space, fire safety and privacy between buildings, given that; 1) The new residence will be set back a minimum of 100' (approx.) from the closest neighboring residence across Meyer Rd. (20 and 24 Meyer Rd.) and a minimum of 300' (approx.) from all other neighboring residences (166 Wolfe Grade and 20 and 25 Brushwood Ln.); and 2) the project is conditioned to be designed and constructed in accordance with the most current building, fire safety and seismic codes; d. The project will provide for adequate, safe and effective off-street parking and loading facilities, given that; 1) The proposed project will provide two (2) covered on- site parking spaces and two (2) additional uncovered on-site parking spaces to meet the requirements for new single-family development on streets less than 26' -wide; and 2) The proposed project has been previously reviewed by the Board on February 7, 2017 who unanimously recommended approval of the site and building design, including the on-site parking; e. The proposed project will promote a safe, effective traffic circulation system, and maintain acceptable local circulation system operating condition, given that; during conceptual design review of the project, the Board provided comments that the new driveway approach to Meyer Rd. should be widened to allow easy -to -maneuver and safe egress and ingress; f. The project will preserve and enhance natural resources and key visual features in the community, including the bay, shoreline, canal, wetlands and hillsides, given that; the project proposes to locate the new residence at the base of the hillside, closest to Meyer Rd., and below the existing ridgeline and tree line to preserve a majority of the site in its existing natural state; g. The project will coordinate the service demands of new development with the capabilities of existing streets, utilities and public services, given that; the proposed project has been reviewed by the City's Traffic Engineer and all utility service providers who have indicated that the service demands of the project can be met, subject to the payment of fees to offset impacts; and h. The project has provided opportunities for effective citizen participation in decision- making, given that; staff referred the project to the appropriate neighborhood groups (Gerstle Park Neighborhood Assn. and the Southern Heights Homeowner's Association) early in the review process. Additionally, staff noticed all three (3) public hearings on the project (November 18, 2014 concept review, February 7, 2017 formal design review and this Planning Commission hearing) in compliance with Chapter 29 of the Zoning Ordinance (Public Notice). Notice of all three separate meetings and this hearing were mailed to all property owners and occupants within a 300 -foot radius of the site, the appropriate neighborhood groups and all interested parties, a minimum of 15 calendar days prior to the meetings or hearing, and notice was posted on the project site along the Meyer Rd. frontage prior to all meetings. All public comments received during the review of the proposed project are attached to staff's report (Exhibit 7). All public comments were neither in support or opposition of the project but, rather, are individual `concerns'. Comments received from other City departments and non -City agencies on the project have been incorporated in the review, either as plan revisions or conditions of approval; and 3. As documented in the Zoning Ordinance Consistency Table (Exhibit 5 of the Julv 11, 2017 Planning Commission staff report) attached to the staff report to the Planning Commission, the proposed project will be consistent with the purposes of Environmental and Design Review Permits, given that; a. The project will maintain and improve the quality of, and relationship between, development and the natural environment, given that; 1) The project proposes to locate the new residence at the base of the hillside, closest to Meyer Rd., and below the existing ridgeline and tree line to preserve a majority of the site in its existing natural state; 2) The project proposes to limit existing tree removal to 35 trees to preserve a majority of the site in its existing natural state; and 3) The project proposes to preserve those potion of the ridgeline within an protected private open space easement which also would preserve a majority of the site in its existing natural state; and b. The project will promote design excellence by encouraging creative design and the innovative use of materials and methods and techniques, given that: the Board has reviewed the proposed site and building design and recommended approval, subject to minor modifications which have been incorporated into revised plans for review by the Planning Commission; and c. The project will preserve and enhance views from other buildings and public property, given that; 1) As identified in Finding A2 (c) above, the new building will provide a minimum 100' (approx.) setback from the closest neighboring residence; and 2) As identified in Finding A3 (a) above, the project proposes to maintain a majority of the hillside in a natural state by locating development adjacent to Meyer Rd., limiting tree removal, and preserving the ridgeline and tree line in perpetuity with a private conservation easement; and B. The project design is consistent with all applicable site, architecture and landscaping design criteria and guidelines for the Single -Family Residential — Hillside Development Overlay (R1a-H) District in which the site is located, given that; 1. The project design will be consistent with the maximum allowable building height for the site (30' allowed; 27.5' above existing grade proposed) 2. The project design will be consistent with the maximum allowable lot coverage for the site (25% or 23,714 sq. ft. allowed, 2.6% or 2,479 sq. ft. proposed); 3. The project design will be consistent with the minimum required yard setbacks for the site, as follows: 20' front required; 35' front proposed; 15' side required; 133' side (west)/120' (east) side proposed; 25' rear required; 96' rear proposed. 4. The project design will be consistent with the `step back' requirement for the site, as all downslope exterior walls will be a maximum height of 20' above existing grade; 5. The project design will be consistent with the minimum `natural state' requirement on the site (71.7% or 68,012 sq. ft. required; 86.9% or 82,457 sq. ft. proposed) 6. The project design will be consistent with the maximum `gross building square footage' allowed for the site (6,500 sq. ft. allowed; 3,570 sq. ft. proposed); 7. The project design will be consistent with the parking requirement for the site. As follows: • Two (2) covered parking spaces required; two (2) garage parking spaces proposed; and • Two (2) additional on-site parking spaces required due to non -conforming width of Meyer Rd.; two (2) additional uncovered on-site parking spaces on driveway proposed. 8. The proposed project will be consistent with review criteria for Environmental and Design Review Permits (Chapter 14.25 of the Zoning Ordinance), given that; the Board reviewed the formal application submittal at their February 7, 2017 meeting and, after determining the project adequately met the review criteria for Environmental and Design Review Permits, unanimously (4-0-2; Kent and Lentini absent) recommended approval of proposed building and site design, subject to minor modifications which have been incorporated in revised plans reviewed by the Planning Commission. C. The project design minimizes adverse environmental impacts, given that: The project proposes to remove 35 existing trees, five (5) of which are deemed `significant' (i.e., any Oak tree more than 6" in diameter or any tree more than 12" in diameter, as measured 4.5' above the root crown, and in good health and form), which are required in hillside developments, to be replaced at a 3:1 ratio or 15 replacement trees are required. The project proposes to plant 16, 15 -gallon container size, replacement trees, all of which are California native ornamental species; 2. The proposed project includes storm water detention dissipater areas along the Meyer Rd. frontage, between the residence and Meyer Rd., which will help mitigate the resulting impacts of storm water surface runoff from the site; and 3. The site neither contains, nor is immediately contiguous to, recognizable wetlands, creeks or similarly sensitive environmental features, and it has not been identified in the San Rafael General Plan 2020 (Exhibit 38 — Threatened and Endangered Species) as a general location were threatened and endangered species have been previously observed or maintain a suitable habitat for their likely presence to be found. D. The project design, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity, or to the general welfare of the City, given that: 1) The project has been reviewed by appropriate City departments, non -City agencies, the appropriate surrounding neighborhood group (Gerstle Park Neighborhood Assn. and the Southern Heights Homeowner's Assn.) and the Board; 2) Conditions of approval have been included to mitigate any potential negative impacts anticipated to be generated by the grading and construction proposed by the project; and 3) The project would not change or increase the allowable density of residential development on the site over the existing single-family residential land use. Exception (EX17-007) Findings 1. There are no site development alternatives which avoid ridgeline development, given that; the entire site is located within 100 vertical feet of the ridgeline; no alternative location on the site exists which would not require the granting of the Exception to ridgeline development on the site; 2. The density has been reduce to the minimum allowed by the General Plan land use designation density range, given that; the site has a General Plan land use designation of Hillside Residential (HR), which allows 0.5-2 units of gross density per acre and is consistent with the one (1) residential unit proposed by the project on the site; 3. No new subdivision lots are created which will result in ridgeline development, given that; the project does not propose to subdivide the site and the site is ineligible for subdivision under the City's currently adopted Subdivision Ordinance. The site is 94,857 sq. ft. in area, slightly over 2 acres. Pursuant to Section 15.07.020(a) of the Subdivision Ordinance, any subdivision of the site would need to create parcels with a minimum lot size of 2 acres, based on the HR General Plan land use designation and the 46.7% average cross -slope; and 4. The proposed development will not have significant adverse visual impacts due to modifications for height, bulk design, size, location, siting and landscaping, which avoid or minimize the visual impacts of the development, as viewed from all public viewing areas, given that the intent of the City's adopted hillside development standards and design guidelines is to reduce adverse visual impacts and adherence to these applicable standards and guidelines will reduce project impacts as much as possible. To reduce perceived bulk and mass on hillsides, new development on the site should both preserve as much existing landscape screening as possible and augment with additional landscape screening, should be located as close as possible to the Meyer Rd. frontage and should step up with the existing natural slope. As currently proposed, the new residence would not project above the ridgeline on the site and potential public views of the natural ridge tree silhouette would not be interrupted. The applicant has installed story poles to help demonstrate the scale and height or visual impacts of the project, representing the exterior wall heights at the corners of the new residential structure and the roof ridge. At their February 7, 2017 meeting, the Design Review Board unanimously recommended approval of the proposed building and site design with minor modifications. WHEREAS, the City Council makes the following findings of fact related to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Findings The project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to Section 15303 (a) (New Structures), of the CEQA Guidelines; which exempts single-family residences located within single-family residential zoning districts. The project proposes to construct a new, 3,570 sq. ft., single-family residence on a vacant parcel located within the R1a-H District, a single-family residential district. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of San Rafael City Council does hereby approve Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED15-027) and Exception (EX17- 007), subject to the following conditions of approval: Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED15-027) Conditions of Approval General and On -Going Communitv Development Department, Planninq Division 1. The building techniques, colors, materials, elevations and appearance of the project, as presented to the Planning Commission at their July 11, 2017 hearing, by Oberkamper & Associates Civil Engineers Inc. (Sh. C1-C6 and 1), Fredric C. Divine Associates Architects (Sh. A1.1, A1.2, A2 and A3) and Matthew Reilly Landscape Architect (Sh. V1 and V2), and on file with the Community Development Department, Planning Division, shall be the same as required for issuance of all building/grading permits, subject to these conditions. Minor modifications or revisions to the project shall be subject to review and approval of the Community Development Department, Planning Division. Further modifications deemed not minor by the Community Development Director shall require review and approval by the original decision making body, the City Council, or the City's Planning Commission, and may require review and recommendation by the City's Design Review Board. 2. The approved colors for the project are on file with the Community Development Department, Planning Division. Any future modification to the color palette shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Division and those modifications not deemed minor shall be referred to the Design Review Board for review and recommendation prior to approval by the Planning Division. 3. This Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED15-027) approves the construction of a 3,570 sq. ft., multi -story single-family residence and associated site improvements (driveway, retaining walls, drainage and landscaping) on a vacant 94,857 sq. ft. hillside and ridgeline parcel (APN: 012-291-15). 4. The lower uncovered parking space along the driveway, closest to Meyer Rd., is required to be redesign to include a landing with an average cross -slope no greater than 10%. 5. The applicant shall provide a copy of the recorded legal instrument which creates the private open space easement along that portion of the ridgeline on the site. This document shall contain language prohibiting development of any kind and making this private open space easement irrevocable and in perpetuity. 6. All `off -haul' of excavation and delivery/pick-up of construction equipment shall occur during off-peak weekday hours only, between 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. 7. All grading and construction activities, including any and all deliveries of equipment, materials and workers, shall be limited to 7 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9 a.m. to 6 p.m., Saturdays. Low -noise construction, occurring entirely within the interior of the building, may be permissible beyond these approved days/hours of operation with prior approval by the Planning Division and only after the building is completely enclosed (walls, roof, doors and windows). Any work on Sundays and federally -recognized holidays is strictly prohibited. 8. Final landscape and irrigation plans for the project shall comply with the provisions of Marin Municipal Water District's (MMWD) most recent water conservation ordinance (currently Ordinance 429). Construction plans submitted for issuance of building/grading permit shall be pre -approved by MMWD and stamped as approved by MMWD. The building permit application submittal shall include a letter from MMWD approving the final landscape and irrigation plans. Modifications to the final landscape and irrigation plans, as required by MMWD, shall be subject to review and approval of the Community Development Department, Planning Division. 9. All new landscaping shall be irrigated with an automatic drip system and maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, free of weeds and debris, at all times. Any new landscaping dying or dead shall be replaced in a timely fashion. 10. All public streets that are impacted by the grading and construction operation for the project shall be kept clean and free of debris at all times. The general contractor shall sweep the nearest street and sidewalk adjacent to the site on a daily basis unless conditions require greater frequency of sweeping. 11. All submitted Building Permit plan sets shall include a plan sheet incorporating these conditions of approval. 12. If archaeological or cultural resources are accidentally discovered during excavation/grading activities, all work will stop within 100 feet of the resource and the qualified archaeologist will be notified immediately. The qualified archaeologist will contact Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria (FIGR) and the Planning Division and coordinate the appropriate evaluation of the find and implement any additional treatment or protection, if required. No work shall occur in the vicinity until approved by the qualified archaeologist, FIGR and Planning Division staff. Prehistoric resources that may be identified include, but shall not be limited to, concentrations of stone tools and manufacturing debris made of obsidian, basalt and other stone materials, milling equipment such as bedrock mortars, portable mortars and pestles and locally darkened soils (midden) that may contain dietary remains such as shell and bone, as well as human remains. Historic resources that may be identified include, but are not limited to, small cemeteries or burial plots, structural foundations, cabin pads, cans with soldered seams or tops, or bottles or fragments or clear and colored glass If human remains are encountered (or suspended) during any project -related activity, all work will halt within 100 feet of the project and the County Coroner will be contacted to evaluate the situation. If the County Coroner determines that the human remains are of Native American origin, the County Coroner shall notify FIGR within 24 -hours of such identification who will work with Planning staff to determine the proper treatment of the remains. No work shall occur in the vicinity without approval from Planning staff. 13. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify, release and hold harmless the City, its agents, officers, attorneys, employees, boards and commissions from any claim, action or proceeding brought against any of the foregoing individuals or entities ("indemnities"), the purpose of which is to attack, set aside, void or annul the approval of this application or the adoption of any environmental document which accompanies it. This indemnification shall include, but not be limited to, damages, costs, expenses, attorney fees or expert witness fees that may be asserted or incurred by any person or entity, including the applicant, third parties and the indemnities, arising out of or in connection with the approval of this application, whether or not there is concurrent, passive or active negligence on the part of the indemnities. 14. In the event that any claim, action or proceeding as described above is brought, the City shall promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action or proceeding, and the City will cooperate fully in the defense of such claim, action, or proceeding. In the event the applicant is required to defend the City in connection with any said claim, action or proceeding, the City shall retain the right to: 1) approve the counsel to defend the City; 2) approve all significant decisions concerning the manner in which the defense is conducted; and 3) approve any and all settlements, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. Nothing herein shall prohibit the City from participating in the defense of any claim, action or proceeding, provided that if the City chooses to have counsel of its own to defend any claim, action or proceeding where applicant already has retained counsel to defend the City in such matters, the fees and the expenses of the counsel selected by the City shall be paid by the City. 15. The applicant agrees to be responsible for the payment of all City Attorney expenses and costs, both for City staff attorneys and outside attorney consultants retained by the City, associated with the reviewing, process and implementing of the land use approval and related conditions of such approval. City Attorney expenses shall be based on the rates established from time to time by the City Finance Director to cover staff attorney salaries, benefits, and overhead, plus the actual fees and expenses of any attorney consultants retained by the City. Applicant shall reimburse City for City Attorney expenses and costs within 30 days following billing of same by the City. 16. This Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED15-027) shall run with the land and shall remain valid regardless of any change of ownership of the project site, subject to these conditions, provided that a building/grading permit is issued and construction commenced or a time extension request is submitted to the City's Community Development Department, Planning Division, within two (2) years of approval, or September 18, 2019. Failure to obtain a building permit and construction commenced or failure to obtain a time extension within the two-year period will result in the expiration of this Environmental and Design Review Permit. 17. This Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED15-027) shall run concurrently with the Exception (EX17-007) approval. If the Environmental and Design Review Permit expires, the Exception approval shall also expire and become invalid. Prior to Issuance of Grading/Building Permits Communitv Development Department, Plannina Division 18. A Construction Management Plan (CMP) shall be prepared and submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval by staff with the recommendation of the City Engineer. The CMP shall include, but is not limited to, carpool details for construction workers, proposed construction truck route, proposed location of material staging areas, proposed location of construction trailers, proposed location of construction worker parking, proposed dust control program, a statement that immediately impacted neighbors along Meyer Rd. (15, 18, 19, 20, 24, 28, 32 and 36 Meyer Rd.) shall receive weekly notices of the upcoming construction/grading schedule, a statement that all delivers of materials shall be small loads and more frequent, a statement that all delivery of materials and grading shall be flagman -assisted as needed, a statement that vehicular traffic shall be maintained along Meyer Rd. at all times, a statement that the project shall conform to the City's Noise Ordinance (Chapter 8.13 of the San Rafael Municipal Code), as modified by these conditions, which limits the days and hours of all grading and construction activities. In the event that the CMP is conflicting with any conditions imposed by the grading permit for the project, the more restrictive language or conditions shall prevail. Public Works Department 19. A grading permit is required from the Public Works Department (111 Morphew St.). Provide detailed grading plans and soil erosion plans. Include a Construction Management Plan. Provide a statement from Marin Municipal Water District that the driveway may encroach over their existing easement. 20. A traffic mitigation fee of $16,984 shall be required. 21. The drainage plan shall be modified to show all storm water facilities (detention and dissipater systems) shall be located completely on-site and maintained by the owner. 22. The project proposes a total of more than 2,500 sq. ft. of new impervious area, Provide a storm water control plan in compliance with MCSTOPPP requirements. Please refer to http://www.marincountv.orq/depts/pw/divisions/mcstoppp/development/new-and- redevelopment-proiects. 23. All work in the public right of way requires the issuance of an encroachment permit from the Public Works Department. The project engineer shall submit three (3) sets of plans showing all work proposed in the public right-of-way, including details of all utilities, to the City Engineer for review and approval. 24. Include a BMP (Best Management Practices) sheet with each construction drawing set submitted for building permit. 25. A construction vehicle impact fee shall be required, which is calculated at 1% of the valuation, with the first $10,000 of valuation exempt. Communitv Development Department, Buildinq Division 26. School fees will be required for the project. School fees for residential construction are currently computed at $2.97 per square foot. Calculations are done by the San Rafael City Schools, and those fees are paid directly to them and proof of payment shall be submitted to the Building Division prior to issuance of the building permit. 27. The design and construction of all site alterations shall comply with the 2016 California Residential Code, 2016 California Building Code, 2016 Plumbing Code, 2016 Electrical Code, 2016 California Mechanical Code, 2016 California Fire Code, 2016 California Energy Code, 2016 Title 24 California Energy Efficiency Standards, 2016 California Green Building Standards Code and City of San Rafael Ordinances and Amendments, or the codes that are in effect at the time of building permit submittal. 28. A building permit is required for the proposed work. Applications shall be accompanied by four (4) complete sets of construction drawings to include: a) Architectural plans b) Structural plans H C) Electrical plans d) Plumbing plans e) Mechanical plans f) Fire sprinkler plans g) Site/civil plans (clearly identifying grade plan and height of the building) h) Structural Calculations i) Truss Calculations j) Soils reports k) Green Building documentation 1) Title -24 energy documentation 29. Each building shall have address identification placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the street or road fronting the property. For new construction and substantial remodels, the address shall be internally -illuminated or externally -illuminated and remain illuminated at all hours of darkness. Number shall be a minimum 4 inches (4") in height with '/2 inch stroke for residential occupancies. The address shall be contrasting in color to their background. 30. The new address of the structure is determined by the Chief Building Official. The tentative address for the proposed dwelling is 23 Meyer Rd. The address for the new dwelling shall be legalized upon completion of its construction. The title block on each sheet of each plan set for all permit applications shall provide the proposed building's address identification information. 31. A detailed soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer to address the proposed grading (soils export, import and placement) or site remediation. In particular, the report shall address the compaction of soils at the building pad and driveway locations and shall be based on an assumed foundation design. 32. As a new building, the project is required to comply with the California Green Building Code, including Tier 1 standards. 33. All new construction, additions, or remodels shall comply with the Wood -Burning Appliance Ordinance. New wood burning fireplaces and non -EPA certified wood stoves are prohibited. 34. This new building is located within a Wildland-Urban Interface Area. The building materials systems and/or assemblies used in the exterior design and construction shall comply with California Building Code Chapter 7A. San Rafael Fire Department, Fire Prevention Bureau 35. The design and construction of all site alterations shall comply with the 2016 California Fire Code and City of San Rafael Ordinances and Amendments. 36. Deferred Submittals for the following fire protection systems shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval and permitting prior to installation of the systems: a) Fire Sprinkler plans (Deferred Submittal to the Fire Prevention Bureau) 37. The following additional fire protection features shall be incorporated in the project design: a) Street address sign shall be visible from the roadway as per SRMC Chapter 4 Section 505.1. b) KNOX key switch is required if a driveway gate is installed as per SRMC Chapter 4 Section 506.1. C) The existing fire hydrant adjacent to the project shall be upgraded per SRMC Chapter Section 507.5.1.2.2. 38. When a building is fully sprinklered, all portions of the exterior building perimeter shall be located within 250 -feet of an approved fire apparatus access road designed to meet the following standards: a) The minimum width of the fire apparatus access road shall be 20 feet. b) The minimum inside turning radius for the fire apparatus access road shall be 28 feet. C) If the fire apparatus access road serving this building is more than 150 feet in length, an approved turn -around shall be provided. Please contact the Fire Prevention Bureau(robert.sinnott(a)citvofsanrafael.orq or (415) 458-5004) for specific details. d) All fire lanes shall be designated; painted red with contrasting white lettering stating "No Parking Fire Lane". A sign shall be posted in accordance with the CFC Section 503.3. 39. This property is located in a Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) area. Provide a written Vegetation Management Plan (VMP) that includes a 200'graduated fuel management design submitted to the San Rafael Fire Department. This VMP must be completed and verified prior to final approval. Requirement of continued compliance with the approved VMP must be placed within CC&R's. San Rafael Sanitation District 40. The proposed new sewer facilities shall adhere to the San Rafael Sanitation District (SRSD) Standard Specifications for Side Sewers and Laterals. The applicant shall provide a profile for the surface and invert elevations for the proposed pipeline. 41. Provide information on type, size, slope and details on the proposed utility trench and backfill. 42. Cleanouts are required every 90 linear feet and must be installed at each bend or change in direction greater than 450 . 43. A sewer connection fee of $8,980.16 is required, which may increase based on date of building permit issuance. During Construction Marin Municipal Water District 44. The parcel shall be eligible for water service upon request and fulfillment of the following requirements: a) Complete a High Pressure Water Service Application. b) Submit a copy of the approved building permit. c) Pay the appropriate fees and charges. d) Complete the structure's foundation within 120 days of the date of the application. e) Comply with the Main Municipal Water District (MMWD) rules and regulations in effect at the time service is requested. 12 f) Comply with all indoor and outdoor requirements of District Code Title 13 — Water Conservation. Indoor plumbing fixtures shall meet specific efficiency requirements. Landscape, irrigation, grading and fixture plans shall be submitted to the District for review and approval. Any questions regarding District Code Title 13 — Water Conservation should be directed to the District's Water Conservation Department at (415) 945-1497. You may also find information on the District's water conservation requirements online at www.marinwater.orci.. g) Comply with the backflow prevention requirements, if upon the Districts review backflow protection is warranted, including installation, testing and maintenance. Questions regarding backflow requirements should be directed to the Backflow Prevention Program Coordinator at (415) 945-1558. h) Use of recycled water is required, where available, for all approved uses, including irrigation and the flushing of toilets and urinals. Questions regarding the use of recycled water should be directed to (415) 945-1558. Pacific Gas & Electric 45. Electric and gas service to the project site will be provided in accordance with the applicable extension rules, which are available on PG&E's website at httr)://www.pge.com/mvhome/customerservice/other/newconstruction or contact (800) PGE -5000. It is highly recommended that PG&E be contacted as soon as possible so that there is adequate time to engineer all required improvements and to schedule any site work. 46. The cost of relocating any existing PG&E facilities or conversion of existing overhead facilities to underground shall be the sole responsibility of the applicant or property owner. 47. Prior to the start excavation or construction, the general contractor shall call Underground Service Alert (USA) at (800) 227-2600 to have the location of any existing underground facilities marked in the field. Prior to Occupancy Communitv Development Department, Planning Division 48. Final inspection of the project by the Community Development Department, Planning Division, is required. The applicant shall contact the Planning Division to request a final inspection upon completion of the project. The final inspection shall require a minimum of 48-hour advance notice. 49. All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed prior to occupancy. In the alternative, the applicant or property owner shall post a bond with the City in the amount of the estimated landscaping/irrigation installed cost. In the event that a bond is posted, all areas proposed for landscaping shall be covered with bark or a substitute material approved by the Planning Division prior to occupancy. Deferred landscaping through a bond shall not exceed three (3) months past occupancy. 50. The landscape architect for the project shall submit a letter to the Planning Division, confirming the landscaping has been installed in compliance with the approved project plans and the irrigation is fully functioning. 51. All exterior lighting shall be shielded to reduce off-site glare. A minimum of one (1) foot candle at ground level overlap shall be provided at all exterior doorways and throughout 13 the vehicle parking area. Less than one (1) foot candle at ground level overlap shall be provided on all property lines. 52. All ground- and rooftop -mounted mechanical equipment shall be fully screened from public view. 53. All trash and recycling containers shall be fully screened from public view within an appropriately located and designed enclosure structure. After Occupancy Community Development Department, Planning Division 54. Following the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, all new exterior lighting shall be subject to a 90 -day lighting level review period by the City to ensure that all lighting sources provide safety for the building occupants while not creating a glare or hazard on adjacent streets or be annoying to adjacent residents. During this lighting review period, the City may require adjustments in the direction or intensity of the lighting, if necessary. Exception (EX17-007) Conditions of Approval This Exception (EX17-007) approves the construction of a single-family residence within a development envelope located at the base of the hillside and ridgeline site, along the Meyer Rd. frontage. The specific building design and location shall be consistent with the Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED15-027) approval. 2. This Exception shall run shall run concurrently with the Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED15-027) approval. If the Environmental and Design Review Permit expires, the Exception shall also expire and become invalid. I, ESTHER C. BEIRNE, Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City held on Monday, the 18th day of September, 2017, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Bushey, Colin, Gamblin, McCullough & Mayor Phillips NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ESTHER C. BEIRNE, City Clerk 14 0 x S 60_20'03" E — 78.29' 001 NI N \rte 0 8"B o B - " RED 0 I r » » k©0 g�RKED 0 B o / 8nM 6',B Fb'RKED7 '0 °12J0 9 1 "0 o O 18" \ 6"0 1210 12" I Z i I I \ LLL G \ j f 16' �1z \ a- LL O Q I L Li LL � I \ \ C ! 0"B �� o N 30°45'32" E W0 \ �3pe 12.69' 0 S(9, \ 200.4 W O \ / 1.8, I zoo F \ p 200 ylr s�ec,sN Ke \ )(100.0 � 207 � \ \ 100, —20022 60d top PI XPOO.hole \ \ �� 7oV \ '� / \ -203 18' 5e3.5 ik\ 1g"0 7"0 24"0 e t`n,o"n N. pp \ C� O� 17'" 7„B 12 -•• RnraelAve Ma{g�EwvA ! San Rafael Ave Gerstle Park o65� J 3 A1vInBAve GersUe Park Inn .b oYOn I U) W ON Q .Vo v� m o r-. -f �'e -rarnsh V” Ln n i Anlanefte Ave 0 to 0 �y Davidson Middle School gyve C) K_ N O PROIEC7 O �@yerRC MEYER RD. Cie Parenpo m � a \ � '� B Old o H Corte �� EDGE MENS. �� 5� 1 OF PAV \ FALLEN ^ 14"B » �» m` � ohm 7��09rS 55°05'54" ° »Man data 92012 Golulel O �d rc spiaekw8 J E 60.60 1y 2 9» ° 1 0z \ 4\3�, VICINITY MAP \�O fd RR SPIKE / 12"B , "B \ \�6' \ / � / 1 2-15 \ / o8 \ o MM \ EDOE '()F N11 AVEMFNT —' — \ Wp OOl \ \ ESE rr 7"B _ _` _ ° 6 ii S„B 015"B \ MEDT B RED \ ° »B d D n� fi"g ° o »B B FO 1 E B "�6" o "B- \ \ 3,\ 0 12"B RE ED RE FO 2»,6»B \ 6"00 e 7° _ FO Z� 1 ' B 0 14"B \ \ \ �0 8„0 6 ° A ,KED 70, o F °s 0 140 L/F� C� T 2 ,r 15"0 „ 012„ 5 K 800 ' "0 „ 13-6 KIR 0 2 6 c ° RK " 12"0 0 '0 1 10",7"0 FORKED o \ \ 09"0 011"0 v 4' ,6. 13 EAD ° 10 o 010 ° 0 RED \ 011,911 9" \ / °PD 0 ' E \ 6B / 0� », 4" ° g" 0 " FO D / / \ 6„B / 17' ° / 5„B RK ° D 8r, / o ED / 0 D -6"14” B 0bL F KED / .10 B / `\\� 01 PQ / ° 7"B "loo, ADO / / / ,ro 1200 14„ � 09 / SON 8"B /pF ° . 8„° l o <ED a0 FORK / R O 6 ° 7»0//'bFORKED ° 8 \ ° ” AD 12 09 9 0 9"00 ORK 16„ ;��8-0 3„ 5",8'B 091 O f 8" o°' 9" O $��° °6"° 01 "0 ° 21"0 \ ° 9„0 11",7 0 15»B / ,r 10 u / 12 l�Lll V JLR\,'ATI ON ASEM ENT ,RKED \ 0'1L 6»° 11 B / AD / /001�,r av FORK D oRED°\ 700 \ o\ o °6' B ° 2„B / / B 11 N0 CIDFORKE° � F RKED 011"0 \ \ o 12 B B z 14"0 6"0 i 0" 0 2-12"B ' - LEGEND 12"0 g 0 13"0 ° 9"0 D 1 0 FORKED / -- PROPERTY LINE ° ° 14"0 �� ° — RED �� CO EASEMENT LINE 6„ o o \ " 13"0 — — — _ _ �� N EXISTING EDGE OF PAVEMENT 014" \° 017"0 _ D 3 N3J CONTOURS (2' INTERVAL) � � - N 59°50'12" W 17'0 013"0 382.07' Wyl EX. HYDRANT TREES: SEE THE ARBORIST REPORT BY KENT JULIN, DATED MARCH 26, 2015 FOR ALL TREES WITHIN THE PROJECT WORK AREA. NOTE: BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHY SHOWN HEREON IS BASED ON A SURVEY BY LAWRENCE P. DOYLE OF MILL VALLEY, CA DATED 8/1/98. AN ASSUMED ELEVATION DATUM WAS USED. . ,vFESSM �o) E. OBERk,. 4 N . 1 094 �� OF C Atix��� 6/25/15 20' 0 20' SCALE. • 1 "= 20' 40' a a Q Ln N U) W ON Q .Vo — V ,^ UZON z r-. W NN Q QWa6�o W O LL. caZWCD LL U O oeVN�o O WZ0� > �W�O z U —0 Jv U >oZ � Z LLJ 0 CIO O _Z O Z Z >N_ Q W J OC a - of W d U) Z O N W of cD Q M M Z — N M Ln N W ON Q .Vo — V ,^ UZON r-. O— NN Q QWa6�o W O LL. caZWCD LL U O oeVN�o WZ0� > �W�O z Ln� —0 Jv >oZ � LLJ 0 CIO IY 2L O O O W Cie r D tA N V O Z < �QV J Q CieO LL � Cie O Q W L Z Q Q Q O >_ OC w Lu Q Lu Z D O CIO c� ad 0 J V J W Q OldLL Q Z Q N b o 0 N W uj in sll Q J J O a N >. y, w .n z C � y a+ fn D V SHEET C1 OF 6 09.143 001 NI N ,14"B 140 100 m S 60_20'03" E — 78.29' 8"B RED 7„0 1�"0 2�_'1 ° N 59°50'12" W CONSER�1/ I SIL �1 O F 14"0 19 20 11 �, 20' SANITARY SEWER \ EASEMENT PER DOCU \ #97-066638 X0S IN, OF P S 55-05'54" `� 'N • \ — E 6 0 ' 30 6 , 1)15"B 6'B RED » / 800 Y .. , ,8 B 16 3,,,5 091 .°3 8" o°' 9„ 0 $„0 0 °6»0 21"0 09110 9"0 11,',7 - 010•'x— 15"B 12"B-- RKED 0,1L .AS ME T 6" 11"B FOR7 0 FORKED 12"0� ° 0 °6� 0 2"B „ oV oRED ° ; 8„ o p8� B F RKED 011"0 012 B B 6"0 �0" 0 2-12"B 1 0"�0 4„0 ° 9"0 D 01 -RED 012"0 9 0 \_ 014 `0 6 017"0 13"0 — RE f� 3 3 N3 — -- -- -- — -- — -- --- 17"0 -- 013"0 382.07' EQUAL HEIGHT i 40' R. 0. W. SOIL NAIL WALLS 2 LX1511NV VKUUNU--,,,, ! GUARDRAIL SOLDIER PIPE SHOTCRETE WALL --ANCHOR BLOCK FACE OF s RESTRAINT WALL AT { PROF ERTY LI N E - C; SOIL NAIL KAPYP-R Rn _ zz t. STEEL I -BEAM SECTION A -A HOR. SCALE: 1"=10' VERT. SCALE: 1"=10' 5 San�laeDos 8rvd lq�e 'W�` «cYYY o Middlele Schooll School O. Q. z � 6 O Q 0 6 ae Ave Qoe V J A�;na Ave00 m C� a LEGEND z >- GersSe Is.,U) Park Ionn (� C Q L Z q W EXISTING EDGE OF PAVEMENT Antongne Aye �' @�'g O V) r �0. °tea i :. EX. HYDRANT OZ U W W Lu Z .72 � �hP O ZO 0 C -)W � 6 Z Q F- - n Q OC W E U N_ Upp�� [ifr_ r W a- W a- W a - Z Z Z PROM LOG4TION �� MEYER RD. SAN RAFAEL w w W W c0 MZ- n n h Q N N 60 Q-, UCr M M FALLEN �® O � Z S ' B \ \ 4,38 m � G,,to Pafenao 1 � Ln W � Q 'CN \ \ slo k Men date 82012 Gale \ \ 378. gs, VICINITY MAP U V " \ \\ UZ�cao, � 0 cn o 7 \ \ Q pe Z— a z \ \ > Lu 0< o �ZMO Q Lu U / �VN�o / \ Luz0� CL (3% z m,� / JpLr) / / Q �Ov ' ���z / Lu 00 ey CL ' N mLu 7- O o Q i ' / ' z / / J / Q i / V / / / / / / ON z I SIN Q J O — z - � V Q Z PVI STA = 1+:51.37 928 r VI LLLV = 1l /. ) LT n M P\/I (ZT.A — 0+7R_1 5 � rL4 ± +- PVI ELEV = 109.0 F \/� GARAGE w iLi Lo -20' VG-- I FLOOR 119.UI> tjj U u) 920 _ LLJ U m_ m 1 0 - + LJ �, � PVI STA - 4 3C\21 916 � 0 PVI F1 FV = 100.2 1 o 20 VC — w N J 112 ) 1 m m + �08 w J v'1J G 104 1 00 CROSS Si npp 1 2.80% s oZ 1 wm I �32 Z I �Q Ln uX NI I DATUM ELEV 85.0 1+50 1+00 0+50 0+00 DRIVEWAY PROFILE HOR. SCALE: 1"=20' VERT. SCALE: 1"=10' NOTE: ALL SWALE LINING SHALL BE NORTH AMERICAN GREEN TRM C350 OR APPROVED EQUAL (O.A.E.) SLOPE 1% MIN. _ 12" HIM1311pMINTOP OF ONCRETF RETURN EDGES 6» - 6"MIN OF MAT INTO GROUND 8u 1 r WALL SIDES 12" TURF REINFORCED MAT (TRM) SWALE SECTION NO SCALE NOTE: BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHY SHOWN HEREON IS BASED ON A SURVEY BY LAWRENCE P. DOYLE OF MILL VALLEY, CA DATED 8/1/98. AN ASSUMED ELEVATION DATUM WAS USED. BUILDING NOTES 1. THE AVERAGE SLOPE FOR THE LOT IS 46.7%. 2. THE AVERAGE SLOPE FOR THE BUILDING ENVELOPE (DISTURBED AREA) IS 60.3%. 3. PROPOSED DISTURBED AREA IS 9,000 FT NOT INCLUDING EXISTING PAVED PORTION OF MEYER ROAD WHICH IS 3,400 FT2. 4. THE EARTHWORK QUANTITIES ARE: 580 YD' CUT AND 30 YD' FILL. 4vFESSioi OBE C.7 C J *�9 No. 120 4 OF C 20' 0 20' SCALE 1 "= 20' 40' J Luu- N C5 1 LO N W W N II Q - w tl w y, o O c � of N 4 v V SHEET C2 OF 6 09.143 O Q Ine ae Qoe V mc LEGEND z >- • — — PROPERTY LINE (� C Q L Z EASEMENT LINE EXISTING EDGE OF PAVEMENT O CONTOURS (2' INTERVAL) oC J :. EX. HYDRANT ae > W Lu .72 BUILDING NOTES 1. THE AVERAGE SLOPE FOR THE LOT IS 46.7%. 2. THE AVERAGE SLOPE FOR THE BUILDING ENVELOPE (DISTURBED AREA) IS 60.3%. 3. PROPOSED DISTURBED AREA IS 9,000 FT NOT INCLUDING EXISTING PAVED PORTION OF MEYER ROAD WHICH IS 3,400 FT2. 4. THE EARTHWORK QUANTITIES ARE: 580 YD' CUT AND 30 YD' FILL. 4vFESSioi OBE C.7 C J *�9 No. 120 4 OF C 20' 0 20' SCALE 1 "= 20' 40' J Luu- N C5 1 LO N W W N II Q - w tl w y, o O c � of N 4 v V SHEET C2 OF 6 09.143 (E) 30' WIDE DRAINAGE AND / SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT TO / SAN RAFAEL SANITATION DISTRICT / (E) 30' WIDE DRAINAGE AND 7—SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT TO SAN RAFAEL SANITATION DISTRICT / 6"F VC SS 20' SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT \ E _ S SEWER Mp,�N PER DOCUMENT #97-066638 S \ \ — I S NEW WYE CONNECTION TO— I EXISTING SEWER MAIN LOT 21 R� LOT 3 21 RM 26 \ %'S \ \ PROPOSED 4" LATERAL WITH \ J`�, \ CLEANOUTS EVERY \ 100' O.C. OR LESS \ \ LOT 2 \ 21 RM 26 \ S 60'20'03" E 78.29' — N 59'50'12" W 20' SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT \ �', PER DOCUMENT #97-066638 �\ \ N�Q� \ FYF�� '\ /?o —. 14"- -'` 7"0 0 \ \ 614 8 ",7"0 FORKED 16" 8 8" EAS ME T 12" A".7".8" LOT 1 21 RM 26 S 55'05'54" E 60.60' _21"0 Ll 84-- EAS on-,rte / / / 10, I I I I 0 1� 013"0 382.07' SANITARY SEWER NOTES: A. ALL SIDE SEWERS SHALL BE TESTED IN ACCORDANCE TO THE SAN RAFAEL SANITATION DISTRICT STANDARDS AND IN THE PRESENCE OF THE DISTRICT INSPECTOR. B. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE SAN RAFAEL SANITATION DISTRICT INSPECTOR (CURRENTLY, ROLANDO CALVO; (415)485-3194) NO LESS THAN 48 HOURS PRIOR TO COMMENCING SEWER WORK". LEGEND — — PROPERTY LINE EASEMENT LINE EXISTING EDGE OF PAVEMENT CONTOURS (2' INTERVAL) :. EX. HYDRANT � F S <,000 \ \ \ 11•11r%, BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHY SHOWN HEREON IS BASED ON A SURVEY BY LAWRENCE P. DOYLE OF MILL VALLEY, CA DATED 8/1/98. AN ASSUMED ELEVATION DATUM WAS USED. 4vFESSio OBE C.7 C J W L�7 *�9 No. 120 4civi OF C 30' 0 30' 60' SCALE l' 30' a CL Q — _ i _ \ %'S \ \ PROPOSED 4" LATERAL WITH \ J`�, \ CLEANOUTS EVERY \ 100' O.C. OR LESS \ \ LOT 2 \ 21 RM 26 \ S 60'20'03" E 78.29' — N 59'50'12" W 20' SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT \ �', PER DOCUMENT #97-066638 �\ \ N�Q� \ FYF�� '\ /?o —. 14"- -'` 7"0 0 \ \ 614 8 ",7"0 FORKED 16" 8 8" EAS ME T 12" A".7".8" LOT 1 21 RM 26 S 55'05'54" E 60.60' _21"0 Ll 84-- EAS on-,rte / / / 10, I I I I 0 1� 013"0 382.07' SANITARY SEWER NOTES: A. ALL SIDE SEWERS SHALL BE TESTED IN ACCORDANCE TO THE SAN RAFAEL SANITATION DISTRICT STANDARDS AND IN THE PRESENCE OF THE DISTRICT INSPECTOR. B. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE SAN RAFAEL SANITATION DISTRICT INSPECTOR (CURRENTLY, ROLANDO CALVO; (415)485-3194) NO LESS THAN 48 HOURS PRIOR TO COMMENCING SEWER WORK". LEGEND — — PROPERTY LINE EASEMENT LINE EXISTING EDGE OF PAVEMENT CONTOURS (2' INTERVAL) :. EX. HYDRANT � F S <,000 \ \ \ 11•11r%, BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHY SHOWN HEREON IS BASED ON A SURVEY BY LAWRENCE P. DOYLE OF MILL VALLEY, CA DATED 8/1/98. AN ASSUMED ELEVATION DATUM WAS USED. 4vFESSio OBE C.7 C J W L�7 *�9 No. 120 4civi OF C 30' 0 30' 60' SCALE l' 30' a CL Q Ln 11,W Q .Vo UZocoo, un OV)o� unceZv z W 'k o W O ,L LL- �S Z,,, o U �vN00o WZo� > CLW�oO z m ^, QJp= 0 — LuU00 Lu m Ic a 0 0 0 m L J 7 � r- N -7 N L o 0_ z U Q W �QZ JpLu z °C 0 LLw <oeU w ce QLuW cn � W < O �. oC oC Lu Lu .72 Z ,Q v 1 C Z Joe 0 J Q V J W Q LL OC Z Q N LO_ W bj N II Q o_ W y, o O c � V Gj of N SHEET C3 OF 6 09.143 z w � N U W Z 0 Z O z U N Z WQ � J OC a- O O W W CL CL N N Z Z O O Ln Ln w w (If o✓ W co M Q � M M Z N N) Ln 11,W Q .Vo UZocoo, un OV)o� unceZv z W 'k o W O ,L LL- �S Z,,, o U �vN00o WZo� > CLW�oO z m ^, QJp= 0 — LuU00 Lu m Ic a 0 0 0 m L J 7 � r- N -7 N L o 0_ z U Q W �QZ JpLu z °C 0 LLw <oeU w ce QLuW cn � W < O �. oC oC Lu Lu .72 Z ,Q v 1 C Z Joe 0 J Q V J W Q LL OC Z Q N LO_ W bj N II Q o_ W y, o O c � V Gj of N SHEET C3 OF 6 09.143 TURNAROUND PLAN STANDARD CAR PARKED IN RIGHT SIDE OF GARAGE SCALE: 1"=20' DELIVERY TRUCK (DL -23) ENTRANCE ANITARY SEWER SENT PER DOCUMENT 066638 _ -EDGE 0� ENTRANCE TURN LARGE AASHTO CAR SCALE: 1"=20' SCALE: 1"=20' ANITARY SEWER MENT PER DOCU 066638 S 55-05'54 q6 Q O W O � � W OL \ g9 18 s OF 2AVEOEN 60_60' /• 19 W —PF, Ilao TURNAROUND PLAN WITH ONE ADDITIONAL TURNING MOTION AASHTO LARGE CAR PARKED IN LEFT SIDE OF GARAGE SCALE: 1"=20' Z \ o N ' o� EXIT VISIBILITY SCALE: 1"=20' -- i oo0 w ANITARY SEWER '� 0 SENT PER DOCUMENT \ i 00 066638 �� --- - / =���� / r r TURNAROUND PLAN GUEST 2 - ENTERING SPACE SCALE: 1"=20' \ I ANITARY SEWER \ BENT PER DOCUMENT 066638 \ 18' 10 S 55°05'54" E —/ i /• — — 60.60' `/ / 19 � 1000, CDGL i�r NA VE T oo L — TURNAROUND PLAN Q W O ANITARY SEWER \ w MENT PER DOCUMENT i °L 0666388g - - \ 18' j Pq — � / s Oo, o0 -ERGS �F AVEV0N S 55°05_54"c 60_60' / / 19' ED(T �r NA En iT oo L ')ANITARY SEWER MENT PER DOCU 066638 TURNAROUND PLAN GUEST 2 - EXITING SPACE SCALE: 1"=20' w 16' Q y 0 �`° % ' S S 55 °05b4„ — 60.60' �' 19 1 CGDE Or NAT/EIT 001 18' TURNAROUND PLAN GUEST 1 - EXITING SPACE SCALE: 1"=20' a Q 4 Lf) r --- r— Z ori � Q N D cv J Z o�Q ZV-J QZ � �Z � JQ— QLU Z U ce �c D z NO Lu o�U / WW / �w� W / w Eq J LLJ L¢L Q N o C5 LOo N Q -J J �' 4g0FESSIpN m 0CID BE�`�1�, .a o �—, � � � •y° ami °� w t --j to V * SHEET No. I L 4 OF C AtiX� C4 20' 0 20' 40' OF 6 SCALE 1 "= 20' 09.143 Ln 11, i W m � i Q .Vo — U �1-' z Uz0ON w > � N un V) oe 0:!; Q � Z Q W ap Q o i W o ,L Zrn i Lu U —�_ oCVN°o o U W � <LQJp� — p..., >o 0 ? 0 cmc Z z U \ N z O o J1� _ a- o Of Of w w cn cn z z 0 0 Ln Ln w w _ (If af uj r - O i z N N) 4 Lf) r --- r— Z ori � Q N D cv J Z o�Q ZV-J QZ � �Z � JQ— QLU Z U ce �c D z NO Lu o�U / WW / �w� W / w Eq J LLJ L¢L Q N o C5 LOo N Q -J J �' 4g0FESSIpN m 0CID BE�`�1�, .a o �—, � � � •y° ami °� w t --j to V * SHEET No. I L 4 OF C AtiX� C4 20' 0 20' 40' OF 6 SCALE 1 "= 20' 09.143 Ln 11, i W m � i Q .Vo — U �1-' Uz0ON O > un V) oe 0:!; Q � Z Q W ap Q o i W o ,L Zrn i Lu U —�_ oCVN°o o F- LU > CWm°„° Z � <LQJp� — p..., >o cmc Z WUoo Lu m ey a O o 0 ('*4 4 Lf) r --- r— Z ori � Q N D cv J Z o�Q ZV-J QZ � �Z � JQ— QLU Z U ce �c D z NO Lu o�U / WW / �w� W / w Eq J LLJ L¢L Q N o C5 LOo N Q -J J �' 4g0FESSIpN m 0CID BE�`�1�, .a o �—, � � � •y° ami °� w t --j to V * SHEET No. I L 4 OF C AtiX� C4 20' 0 20' 40' OF 6 SCALE 1 "= 20' 09.143 / I 1 / 1201 4 t m-Qj LLJ 0 N r 2 -ft in 200 z r- / / \ x 100.0 / I fd 60d 202 / X00. se�n 18 /' / / / / / / / 1-01, / 9"B 204 99.7 set spike 1 \ 1 EXISTING PIPE COVER 4.4'�B � 06" PROPOSED PIPE COVER 4.5' 205 L03.5 se ike 1 5 Sano� 81vd R-laelgve W ON Davidson � Middle H — V ,^ UZON School i }fie J D W Ave N0ezv AyviDaAve m QWa0 a Z Gefs0e hr LL U Q0o 0eVNCN O Park Ion z n -0 Jv A z Lu C) 0 AntonettsAve°'g m a Z 0 O Z v) 1 i Q ? rn q tY t1 ""bi� hP w LID i a Cl - 8"B iA���N Ek MMwO N EN � '� SSU wq TER NO RE \ \ w�TRV C gINjNC F'4 \ \o Ty�N E RES coq<<S p ENT) \ 206 ASEMEN /V STRUC E CTNER I v opo X106.7 4 C ►�� ^ s� sQk e \ \ \ \ \ TIERED RETAINING WALLS — i'1 HOW, BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHY SHOWN HEREON IS BASED ON A SURVEY BY LAWRENCE P. DOYLE OF MILL VALLEY, CA DATED 8/1/98. AN ASSUMED ELEVATION DATUM WAS USED. n Q' N U� °ten o, lip 040 sf � +i?ByNrRq L PR MEYER RD. SAN RAFAEL �m 7,w"4 Vvft . a Q Cada PafenpQ Corte ¢ r.� Win date 82012 Gauls VICINITY MAP LEGEND 130 g„B PROPERTY LINE EASEMENT LINE EXISTING EDGE OF PAVEMENT CONTOURS (2' INTERVAL) EX. HYDRANT TREE DIAMETER AND TYPE B_BAY TREE 4, ,UES 10 *�� No. 0 4 P C Ati1�C)4 1' 0 2' 4' 6' 8' 10' SCALE: 114-- 1'-0” a Q Ln N W ON H — V ,^ UZON Z O W N0ezv z QWa0 o W 0 a LL U Q0o 0eVNCN O WZ0 CL W 00 z U -0 Jv >:o z Lu C) 0 O Z 0 Z v) Z Q W J tY t1 w W Cl - (10 Z O N ILLI Of M Q M Z N M Ln N W ON Q .U0 — V ,^ UZON O >Ln Ln cno N0ezv z QWa0 o W 0 a LL U Q0o 0eVNCN WZ0 CL W 00 z m ^, Ln� -0 Jv >:o Lu C) 0 ey CL O 0 0 r -- r- N N r -- O � z _m JOW Lu ;� Cie W Q oG Z DC W J Q Woe W cn � � Q Q O Imle W W N- c� J W L�L Old Q t'n t2 O O 0 W Uj N =II Q o w o -p o c � Cd y to 0 m V m SHEET C5 OF 6 09.143 DRAINAGE INLET (WHERE SHOWN) - TOP OVERFLOW HOLES 2Nj" DIA. HOLES EVERY 6"---, O.C. ALONG PIPE AS SHOWN. PERFORATED PIPE PER TABLE AP 211-�5 2" TO 4" ROCK RIP -RAP _ NDS OF DRAPER TR. APN 12-291-14 166 WOLFE GRADE %F GK OT n2—?1 . - B MEYER RD. DRAIN ROCK DRILL MULL-)rr-R I /iDLL xc, FILTER FABRIC, MIRAFI 170N OR 45° BEND APPROVED EQUIVALENT SECTION A- A NOTE: PERFORATED PIPE MUST BE INSTALLED LEVEL TO ENSURE EVEN STORMWATER DISCHARGE PERFORATED PIPE STORMWATER DISSIPATER/DETENTION STRUCTURE NO SCALE DAYLIGHT SOLID PIPE y I , (NON -PERFORATED) A Q5' BEND PLAN DISSIPATER TABLE SHED DIAMETER LENGTH BOTTOM HOLES B 12" 65' 1" HOLE @ 15' O.C. C 6" 30' 1" HOLE © 10' O.C. LEGEND PROPERTY LINE —--—— EASEMENT '--------- DISSIPATER ROAD \ . 11 1 / /)) Ln N a W ON < .Vo a — ,^ V 07 ON I Q r N�O� (/n Q N W 0 LL. cazWO L U Ld o WZ> � Wcoz Q z -a �Jpp -O v � w � LL,v m Lu QO eyCL O 0 r) 0 Lu O °C U Q 0 W Z O z w W z / W z >N_ Q W J OC a - w w d (%) z O N w Of cD W M Q M Z — N M Ln N W ON < .Vo Q — ,^ V 07 ON Q N r N�O� (/n Q QWae�o W 0 LL. cazWO L U �VNF o WZ> � Wcoz Q m r, � -a �Jpp -O v � Ocke Z oo � LL,v m Lu QO eyCL O 0 r) 0 Lu Z ad 0 J Q V i J W Q Q N (/n N O O U4 o Z >_ a Z .nom Q z -a LL* � Q � 30' 0 30' 60' QO r) C6 Lu 09.143 °C w Q L W O w W / W j J W Q Q (/n \ J O U4 o Q >_ a o .nom m z -a LL* y 30' 0 30' 60' SHEET SCALE. l' 30' C6 OF 6 09.143 CONSULTANTS SCOPE OF WORK ARCHITECT: CIVIL ENGINEER: CONSTRUCTION OF NEW RESIDENCE, NEW DF FREDRIC C DIVINE ASSOCIATES OBERKAMPER & ASSOCIATES WITH OFF-STREET PARKING FOR TWO VEHICL 1924 FOURTH STREET, 7200 REDWOOD BLVD, SUITE 308 HILLSIDE RETAINING WALLS, OUTDOOR PATIO SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 NOVATO, CA 94945 AND LANDSCAPING. PH (415) 457-0220 PH (415) 897-2800 FX (415) 457-9581 FX (415) 897-2020 FREDRIC DIVINE LEE OBERKAMPER LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: MATTHEW REILLY 336 BON AIR CENTER, #226 GREENBRAE, CA 94904 PH (415) 545-8463 FX / MATTHEW REILLY PROPERTY LINE S60020'03"E _ 78.29' I ' EASEMENT 70 GENERAL NOTES PROJECT DATA ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER 012-291-15 1. ALL WORK TO CONFORM TO THE FOLLOWING CODE STANDARDS: ZONING R1a-H -2013 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE (CBC). CONSTRUCTION TYPE TYPE VB - SPRINKLERED -2013 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE (CRC). SITE AREA 94,857 SF -2013 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE (CEC). -2013 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE (CMC). BUILDING: -2013 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE (CPC). FIRST FLOOR LEVEL 1,295 SF -2013 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE (CFC). SECOND FLOOR LEVEL 1,474 SF -2013 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARDS. GROSS LIVING AREA 2,769 SF -2013 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE. GARAGE LEVEL 801 SF -2013 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA REFERENCED STANDARD CODE. GROSS BUILDING AREA 3,570 SF -ALL OTHER APPLICABLE CODES AND REGULATIONS AS ADOPTED BY THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL. SITEWORK: DRIVEWAY 3,475 SF PATIO SPACE 294 SF SITE STAIRS 168 SF \ I I PLANTERS AND WORKED HILLSIDE 2,584 SF GROSS SITEWORK AREA 6,521 SF \ I EXISTING LOT COVERAGE % - 0 SF 94,857 SF = 0% \ I ' NEW LOT COVERAGE % = 2,479 SF / 94,857 SF = 2.6% \ I ALLOWABLE LOT COVERAGE 25% \ ' 0„g 12 „g 8"B W V / ;_0 W � U0 w Q < Ln Q HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT GROSS BUILDING AREA MAX: or_�9� w 2,500 SF + 10% LOT AREA, UP TO 6,500 SF MAXIMUM. Q — � = 2,500 SF + (94,857x 10%) = 11,986 SF > 6,500 SF CD 0 °' LO MAX ALLOWABLE GROSS BUILDING AREA = 6,500 SF W Cn Q Q X NATURAL STATE REQUIREMENTS: AN AREA EQUAL TO 25% OF w SITE PLUS THE AVERAGE SLOPE % OF LOT MUST REMAIN z w UNDEVELOPED/UNDISTURBED. o O o AVERAGE LOT SLOPE: 46.70% Q NATURAL SLOPE FACTOR: 25.00% = U i u' MIN. NATURAL STATE REQ'T: 71.70% U LOT SIZE: 94,857 SF U -� BUILDING FOOTPRINT: 2,479 SF r w Q:� � SITEWORK FOOTPRINT: 6,521 SF =D DISTURBED AREA (NOT INCLUDING PAVED MEYER RD): 9,000 SF N o MEYER ROAD (EXISTING PAVED PORTION): 3,400 SF 0' TOTAL FOOTPRINT AS % OF LOT: 13.07% TOTAL NATURAL STATE: 86.93% W U z W � U0 w Q < Ln Q or_�9� J O -""r°51 .'�N .' �, �' ' _ \ppF Y Cn L w Q N \ - - - - eco / , 14 B ` NE FALLEN W : p Lu loe r7 Z 8"B 54"E EDGE OF .' „ i x� 0 10" `� < 1-N 8„g 1 „0 �0� ��\ z 60.60' PAVING oz� g ,\ Q o 'B RED 7„O \� O�'� \\ W �,' /// y- 12 B 2-15” \��� S\3,� 1 \ \12iB- 0 ° 24'0 \ \epimax \ \-----_�t� 08'\\ 0 10" \ 3j 36>> W \�\ -------- �i CONCRETE ° 8 _ �w oo� �� DRIVEWAY7,5 B51 '\ -8"g O� \\ \ _ _ _ T '70" b B 6„g 15 B � � \ \ \ g„ 7>, \ 0"B \ OO g , — — —x — — — — � I ° g 0� L RED \, t'3 RKED 8\ 0 2' \ O � _ ',c� o "g \ 2 \ \ 0 2� 6„ ° B i ° \ N. ` \ � � � 0 ED RE 7"g B 8 11'^ 00 ° 12" 7” \\\ \\ 8„0 i ------------------- `� RED W H o ” 8"M KED \ O ° GARAGE V a, N \ ° RESIDENCE , 1 g" Z ->6„g ° 1 14'0 \ \ x 0 E \ \------------- iCL 1 n„ 7„0 0 6 B ©15 0 \ \ \ X� i ------- 0�� „ 24„ Q F RKED 0 12"0 012„ \ O15' 08"g FOR D W ^ >> o Y 1 „ \ \ i 6'B 6„g Z 0 18 0 800 \ \ L ----J 11 „ ° b 6 0 O \.F„ R, \ o� 15„g 17 o D W 0 o ORK C.7 13 0 \ \ 2 16' r p 8„ 12'0 ° \ \ RK — o ED ., e 0 014 0 10„ 7„0 %. \ 0 D -6"14"B „ ,g 2 F KED 9 0 125'0 FORKED o \\ F,qs \ \ „ ! 0 6„g 11 0_b D F KED 10' RED 0"M o ° 0 \\ J e 4„ 6„g ° ° W B � p 011 "0 \ DEAD W �12� ° 4 0 14'0 12'0 �. 12"e- ° 10 g °6" /� g \ N. o 010 7„g 0 0 1 „ R 6"0 ° 8"0 N. \ \,� o KED °0 1 �� ��r0 �j Z$ 11 "B F KE �l O 7"0 a14",7"0 8 �\ AD 12 o FORK �P,S���'� 0 0 0 0 0 0 RK O 7 , FORKED \0 „Oo \\ ° g 9 1 ORKE ° \ i i i i i i N M N N 15 0 g„ o O 16„0 800 \ \\ 3„ 5„ 8„g O9l _ R 0 0 0 0 0 0 �0 8 O << Del 1 „0 0„0 9"B ° \°6 0 \\ 21 0 Q�R'`� �• O � \ � 12"0 9 0 11 „,7.0. \ 01 � 0 15"g �0, Q� I � FORKED \ 041- � ADg„O \\ 7„O \\\ 6° 0 11 B 6„B i FORKED 12"0 \ 0 ° 2"B oRED 11' CIO,1 0 \ 6 0 � g 14 0 FORKE F RKED 0 11 "0 \ N. \\ ° 0 12"Bg g 0 'g i I 'C)o 0 3) 6 \1%Q O \ 2-12"B o 12"0 g>>0 1 0 0° g 0 D 1fl— FORKED I 00 140 �� \ o RED M► 6"B 13"0 --- _ 014 �0 017"0 _ _ — ^� c\ -- -- --RED � __ __ __ __ __ __ PROPERTY LINE N5 °50'1 "W -- -- -- -- == 3 ?7Da_ 013"0 _ NORTH SITE PLAN Al.1 SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" I N M Lij LLJ E�j' Q Q Q Q Z2mmmm (7) U) Cn (10 U) O w w w w w woft' ft' o'D:f Q w w w w a =D U w Ld z z z z U_ O of w w w w U Q 0 a a a a a a a Dade: 8-24-14 Scale: As Noted Drawn: Job # 14035 Prototype DIVINE ®1 N%, \ 2, \ �' / 49, \ / 00 N. 11%.\oo, / \ N, O O \ T � / / \ IN. g� -S55 05'54"E EDGE OF , „ 99 99 r1 / \ \ 60.60' - - _ PAVING 12 0 4 ) TRELLIS ` \ O PER A3 B \ O / \ w 4"0S E \ 0- 99 ( \ / LAN P (N) FENCE ---- - WINGS � O k\ \\ -- � PER 10/A3, ----�_- - - - -- _Y _-. / \ � / � (N) RAIL OAD \ \ OO PS, TYP.\ - — � — — — MENT � / O g 9 99 O 9 x OED \ /O CP — —� x fl A UST STEP TO i A- V01 TR S, YP —(N) 4211h � „ _PLANT R �� \ RAILING \� ° 0 12' \ PER 9/A3 \ ' \AA 0 AD 99 I (N) TRELLIS \ 8 ------ \ PER 8A/A3 DRIVEWAY CONCRETE � 8 O / �° �II GARAGE °6 CO RESIDENCE I \ +102' ---_ x06. CONCRETE \ \ \ DRIVEWAY \ J x '08' / N 9 °° 0 899 B.. o 9 ` \ 99 99 STEPPING 80'0 0 -'r-- I STONE PAT 99 99 v NS0 R 99 C) 99 O 0 P. 15 B 13 0 \ \ 2 169 PATIO ORK 0 99 10 ,7 0 TF \ o _ - o D 12"0 FORKED`\ qSF� 0 11 O�b� ° 99 \ ��� \ 99 B ° 0 \ \ \ '� 99 ° oil 7n 499 9 99 B i 011 "0 \ DEAD yy 99 99 .9 ` � ° 10 � 99 11 140 \ \ 0 010 B ` \ N-19 9 ° 9"B 12"0 99 1�0 14 \ R 0g 8"B ° \ \\ 7 , KED R 99 99 \ 99 6 0 ° 7"0 99 99 8© g� 2 X14 ,7 0 ` ` "MAD 1 °g rvoarx ENLARGED SITE PLAN ° 7"B 1 1 99 R,-, 1 99 9 00 FORK 012 S41, 106' + 8' 1C Y V / � w eo � oU I Q Lnrn Lu wQN>- <- (f :mOfoLu w N Z U' Q o LLw QLn Z g o0')LO Ld Cn La ° Q a U 000000 �LL] N N N N N 14I 1 1 1 1 1 LL- J N O O r- O) GO zw NM N N 1 1 1 1 1 1 m M c0 oa ro �CDo O O O O O O 99 9 B o �o C14 r) U can W J J J J Q Q Q Q �Zmmmm LO Z O Z Z Z ��CnCnCn O W W W W W U wo���� C/') o=Ln � Q L'i wQ:� -zt- ��0 U D:f C: N W Z Z Z Z LL - z=222CD U (n (n (n (n Q) O of W W W W U Q 0 Cl -A O Q Date: 1m M, II W"' � w Q � oU I Q J � � Lu wQN>- <- W :mOfoLu Q N Z U' Q o LLw Z J Q CL H N 0 LLI J z 6„E La ° 000000 N N N N N 14I 1 1 1 1 1 O E D N O O r- O) GO NM N N 1 1 1 1 1 1 m M c0 oa ro O O O O O O 99 9 B E KED C14 r) W J J J J Q Q Q Q �Zmmmm 6 ° Z O Z Z Z ��CnCnCn O W W W W W wo���� � Q L'i >w_ >w_ Q =D W W U D:f C: N W Z Z Z Z z=222CD U (n (n (n (n Q) O of W W W W U Q 0 a a a a a a a Date: 8-24-14 Scale: As Noted Drawn: Job # 14035 Prototype DIVINE Al ®2 0 I 00 ------------------------------- ------------------ - – – – – – – ---------- -------------------------I-----� I I I I I t t I I I---------- ---� I -------------------- -�-----------------� NOTE: ROOF SLOPE 4:12 AT ALL LOCATIONS QROOF PLAN A2 SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" 16'-0" DINING 24'-0" i --------- ---------I I I o 0 I , I I - 010 DEN KITCHEN 0 PANTRY11 I I I ---------------- --- I -- PATIO L LIVING FOYER 11 RS S i I I i AT LTJ � � r _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ J ` J I p I I I I I 00 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 7 i 6 i 5 A3 6 5 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I L J FLOOR AREA: 1376 SF (INCLUDES FULL AREA OF STAIRS FROM NORTH 1ST TO 2ND FLOOR, AND STAIRS AND LANDING TO GARAGE.) NORTH D 2 1ST FLOOR PLAN D A2 SCALE: ,/a., _ ,._o. <A3 \IA3) \IA3) \A3) -N 0 I io N ♦ PATIO 0 I 7 A3 BED 3 i r--- ----I — i L------ 46'-0" 1 a / Y I M. BATH HALL M. BED r - - DN p BED 2 II I I I �-1I III I 07[r _® � BED 4 1 1 ED in 6 A3 22'-6" i FLOOR AREA: 1204 SF (INCLUDES FULL AREA OF STAIRS FROM 1ST TO 2ND FLOOR) Q2ND FLOOR PLAN A2 SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" (PLANTER 5 \IA3) � 24'-0" � 8'-611 I'S yC>,♦ ,♦ I � ------ I I STORAGE I I I I I I c> m I I I j l e Co= GARAGE i N I ^ I ip N — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — I l coI I � I I I I I RESIDENCE ATR7YF8 OUTLINE _____ I 2 RISERS o AT 73/ "f �11 iD NUP I UP 7 \-5 RISERS F AT 7Y8"± I I NOTE: STAIRS AND LANDING INCLUDED IN 1ST FLOOR PLAN AREA CALCULATION 6 5 A3 A3 FLOOR AREA: 576 SF (INCLUDES GARAGE ONLY. STAIRS AND NORTH LANDING INCLUDED IN 1ST FLOOR PLAN AREA CALCULATIONS.) NORTH rLN'N��7)' � GARAGE PLAN rL\Nv��7) f,Z SCALE: 1/8•• = 1'_0" V / Of Lu Ln Q n Q N N Lnrn Cn Ld wQN NM aNW (f ��0Lu O O W r7 Z N Q Z C/)QO LL- Q � U U CD O L0 W Cn Q a U W LL- J zw O O O U can LO U U `/') o =L0 W Q:� -4- Q:f =D `- W LLo N O WLO Of Lu Q Q n Q N N J � � Cn Ld wQN NM aNW W ��0Lu O O O O O O r7 Z N Q Z C/)QO LL- Ljj z 0 0 Li - 7t 2 � 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N I I N O I I I I O I- O) W NM N N I I m M I I I I c0 oa M O O O O O O C14 r) w J J J J �QQQQ of Z m m m m Z2>>>> Cn U) Cn Cn Cn O w w w w w woo-o-o'� �awwww Q =D F- U O W F- Z Z Z Z Z U (n (n (n (n f O w w w w � a a a a a a a Date: 8-24-14 Scale: As Noted Drawn: Job # 14035 Prototype DIVINE 12 4F \ "RED 4 STAIR Y U m \ ",�-30' GRADE OFFSET \ \ _ o ROOF PEAK 155.7' \ _ T.O. PLATE150.5 D � HALL M. BATH \ " \ \ 2ND FLR 141.5' FOYER KITCHEN IN, CLOSET \ FIRST FLQQR 130.24 aIN, STO RAI X M ih T.O. SLAB 119.0 BUILDING SECTION B—B A3 Y U m m �30' GRADE Cn OFFSET 4� \ _ ROOF PEAK 155.7' - _ T.O. PLATE 1505 2ND FLR 141.5' nnnn \� LIVING \ o FIRST FLOQR 13 N .., � T n qI AR 1 1�A D'� BUILDING SECTION A3 SCALE: 1/8" 5'-0" 7'-0" 01 J r 2'-6" 2x4 RDWD O.C. n n n n n n j nP" O.C., III II III ll ll \ 2x8 RDWD, TYP. N 36 -...I--6x6 RDWD Tf' CLR.J POST, TYP. 00 II II I II II = METAL RAILING N II II PER 9/A3 II II 11 iL ----- FRONT ELEVATION SIDE ELEVATION A - FOUR POST TRELLIS 8 TRELLIS ELEVATIONS A3 SCALE: 1/4" = V-0" ROOF PEAK 155.75' STUCCO SIDING (FIELD COLOR) ALEXANDRIA BEIGE, TYP. " _ " _ T.O. PI AIL 150 \ TRIM #1, "OREGON TRAIL," TYP. COMPOSITION SHINGLE, TYP. I 2ND FLR 141.5 CLAD WINDOWS, r—/e I J, "CLASSIC BROWN," TYP. TRIM #2 AT SILL, "TUSCAN RED", TYP. 7w FIRST FLOOR 135' / STUCCO SIDING (ACCENT COLOR) "DAVENPORT TAN" Q 4% _ � 1'<-' I II %NATURAL REDWOOD TRELLIS RAILING, BLACK METAL, TYP. TOP OF SLABS 199.0�' 4 EXTERIOR ELEVATION — EAST A3 NOTE: SHOWN WITHOUT LANDSCAPING AND TREES SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" *TOP OF I„ANDLG 103.3' .q�-JOP OF I ANQING 99.0' Y U < \ 30' GRADE a- Lij OFFSET Ln 41 2 \ \ _ o ROOF PEAK 155.7' \ \ _ T.O. PLATE 15_ 0�5 MSTR BR \ \ 2ND FLR 141.5' SL DEN FIRST FI—O92 130.25., ` I 'bARAGE \ - -H T -O. SLAB 11 go 5 BUILDING SECTION A—A A3 SCALE: 1/8" = V-0" 7'-0» 2'-610" 01 2x4 RDWD % .` n n n n n n TYP" O.C., ` J L2x8 RDWD, TYP. )01 36" 6x6 RDWD CLR. POST, TYP. i� FRONT ELEVATION SIDE ELEVATION B - TWO POST TRELLIS <4" ,, 5-0" O.C. MAX 101, 121� CLR 1Y2"x 1)2" MTL 11Yz" METAL ` ivJu Y "x RAILS, TYP. HANDRAIL, W/O AT STAIRS C, -—1Y"x1Y" METAL POST, TYP. /4„x/4„ METAL V�� PICKETS, TYP. QGUARDRAIL ELEVATION A3 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2x4 RDWD J 8'-0" O.C. MAX J CAP, TYP. \�� I------ f 44 RDWD POST, TYP. - WIRE FENCING, o TYP. I 2x4 RDWD BOT. RAIL, TYP.---,,� v I � 10 FENCE ELEVATION A3 s,.ac. 1/4" = 1'-0" CONC. STAIRS AND LANDINGS AT BOTTOM .UFYFR R MFYFR ROa STUCCO SIDING (FIELD COLOR) - - r - - - - - - - - _ ROOF PEAK _155.7' - —+ "ALEXANDRIA BEIGE," TYP. IIITII III II COMPOSITION L< W 11111,1411111 Jill 11 11111111lig SHINGLE, TYP. W 21111 __ __ T.0._PLATE 150.5 RAILING, BLACK_ REVISED GRADE METAL, TYP.� ------- --- _ _ _ 147.0' "OREGON LJ C/) <- TRIM #1, < FLOOR LINE BEYOND r r TRAIL," TYP. L ------2ND zw FLR 141.5' CD ----------- GRADE SHOWN TRIM #2 AT SILL, [)::�o WITH SHORT DASH, TYP. ' u Ulf "TUSCAN RED", TYP. OA3EXTERIOR ELEVATION — SOUTH NOTE: SHOWN WITHOUT LANDSCAPING AND TREES SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" _ _FIRST FLOOR 130.25' EXTERIOR FINISH MATERIALS ROOF: COMPOSITION SHINGLE STUCCO SIDING (FIELD): BENJAMIN MOOR, COLOR "ALEXANDRIA BEIGE" STUCCO SIDING (ACCENT): BENJAMIN MOORE, COLOR "DAVENPORT TAN" WINDOWS: ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD - MILGARD, COLOR "CLASSIC BROWN" TRIM #1: WOOD - BENJAMIN MOORE, COLOR "OREGON TRAIL" TRIM #2: WOOD & STUCCO - BENJAMIN MOORE, COLOR "TUSCAN RED" DOORS: WOOD - BENJAMIN MOORE, COLOR "TUSCAN RED" RAILINGS: METAL - COLOR: BLACK COMPOSITION Of SHINGLE, TYP. TRIM #1, "OREGON �I411 , -1 TRAIL," TYP. \ CLAD WINDOWS, "CLASSIC BROWN," TYP. i�� STUCCO SIDING (FIELD COLOR) TRIM #2 AT SILL, "ALEXANDRIA BEIGE," TYP. TUSCAN RED"TYP STUCCO SIDING zo (ACCENT COLOR) "DAVENPORT TAN" v WOOD DOOR, "TUSCAN RED," TYP. RAILING, BLACK METAL, TYP. NATURAL REDWOOD TRELLIS, SEE 8A/A3 CONC. RETAINING WALL BEYOND, / TYP.�� QF ANpING 99.0' STUCCO SIDING (FIELD COLOR) "ALEXANDRIA BEIGE," TYP. CLAD WINDOWS, "CLASSIC BROWN," TYP. TRIM #1, "OREGON TRAIL," TYP. TRIM #2 AT SILL, "TUSCAN RED", TYP. u u{ ROOF PEAK 155.75' T.O. PLATE 150.5' o 2ND FLR 141.5' FIRST FLOOR 130.25' TOP QF -LANDING 108.3 2 EXTERIOR ELEVATION — WEST A3 NOTE: SHOWN WITHOUT LANDSCAPING AND TREES SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" RAILING, BLACK METAL, TYP. n d r .d __°_-r__ ° ^ d°e • a . ° d ° . d• ----- - TOP OF LANDING 99,0' - 0 1k Of 0 011 0 METAL, TYP. TOP OF -LANDING. 108.3 NATURAL REDWOOD STAIRCASE ROOF PEAK 155.7' COMPOSITION SHINGLE, TYP. T.O. PLATE 150.5' s RAILING, BLACK METAL, TYP. (MUMU '(fl(i[YiEffv�P 2ND FLR 141.5' . ° •d . de LLL��X1111I-1 FIRST FLOOR (L( 130.25' EXTERIOR ELEVATION — NORTH NOTE: SHOWN WITHOUT LANDSCAPING AND TREES SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" TOP OF SLAE 119.0' V / �' Lu �w 00 oU I Q in L< W a "f W Ln Q LTJ Z CD Q 0-) Ln LJ C/) <- < U WLIL- J zw CD < N O [)::�o I U can I U in �N4- U o=Ln W ib:� -z4- Q::� =D' Li O LIL- a� Cl-A O W �' Lu �w 0 oU I Q C) Or -V) Uj L< W a "f N N � o Q LTJ Z N Z O Z ~ O Q J U W (W o� z E W j X W m 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N O O r- M CD N M 1 i N N O) M CO 00 r) "d - CD O O CD O O O C14 lt'0 ��QQaQ wo'���� z m m m m zCD>>>> �n-U)07Cf) Cn 9w w w w w Cn o w �awwww a=D E>j E>jaE>j U D' of Of Of ° w z z z z U = CD 9 9 CD z U (n (n (n (n o� w w w w U < m m 0 aaaaaaa Date: 8-24-14 Scale: As Noted Drawn: Job # 14035 Prototype DIVINE 3 PLANT LEGEND QTY SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME - COMMON NAME SIZE NOTES TREES 1 ACE PAL ACER PALMATUM 'WEEPING' - WEEPING JAPANESE MAPLE 24" BOX 3 ARB UNE ARBUTUS UNEDO - STRAWBERRY TREE 24" BOX R 10 CER OCC CERCIS OCCIDENTALIS - WESTERN REDBUD 24" BOX N, R , 2 PRU LYO PRUNUS ILICIFOLIA SSP. LYONII - CATALINA CHERRY 24" BOX N, R HAZARD ASSESSMENT MATRIX SHRUBS Hazard 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Points 3 CAM SAS CAMELLIA SASANQUA 5 GAL Points _ 15 CHO TER CHOISYA TERNATA - MEXICAN MOCK ORANGE 5 GAL Aspect NE, E Q NW, N _) SE, W S SW 2 1 COR COR CORYLUS CORNUTA- CALIFORNIA HAZELNUT 5 GAL N Slope0-10 11-20 21-30 31 8 3 DAP ODO DAPHNE ODORA MARGINATA - DAPHNE 5 GAL 6 HYD MAC HYDRANGEA MACROPHYLLUM -HYDRANGEA 5 GAL Fuel Specnnen Grass Brush Hardwoods wll3rush Hardwood Grass Mostly Mostly Pyrophoric Conifer Conifer 0-30 Garden 2 OSM FRA OSMANTHUS FRAGRANS - SWEET OSMANTHUS 5 GAL 1 35 RHO OCC RHODODENDRON OCCIDENTALE - CALIFORNIA AZALEA 5 GAL N, A Chaparral under (ALT 1: AZALEA INDICA ALASKA) story (ALT 2: BLOOM-A-THON® WHITE REBLOOMING AZALEA) Fuel Grass, Mostly Pyrophori Conifer 3 RIB SAN RIBES SANGUINEUM - PINK FLOWERING GOOSEBERRY 5 GAL N 31-100 Mostly Brush ` c with brush \ 8 RIB VIB RIBES VIBURNIFOLIUM - CREEPING VIBURNUM 5 GAL Grass Hardwood under story 3 9 VAC OVA VACCINIUM OVATUM - CALIFORNIA HUCKLEBERRY 5 GAL N s Chaparral \ GROUChaparralNDCOVERS & ACCENTS Total Hazard Paints 14 27 CAM POR CAMPANULA PORTENSCHLAGIANA - DRAPING CAMPANULA 5 GAL 40 MAH REP MAHONIA REPENS - CREEPING OREGON GRAPE 5 GAL N \ 10 OPH NIG OPHIOPOGON PLAN ISCAPUS'NIGRESCENS' - BLK MONDO GRASS 5 GAL Minimum Horizontal Modification Requirement in feet 30 \ 33 POL MUN POLYSTICHUM MUNITUM - WESTERN SWORD FERN 5 GAL N "E Hazard Points: 5 WOO FIM WOODWARDIA FIMBRIATA - GIANT CHAIN FERN 5 GAL N \ VINES 1234511 891011121314 15 16 17 18 19 20 2122 23 24 25 \ 6 LON HIS LONICERA HISPIDULA - CALIFORNIA HONEYSUCKLE 5 GAL N, A, V1 300000ft. 3000x50 _ 50x5Ox100 ft. \(ALT: PARTHENOCISSUS TRICUSPIDATA -BOSTON IVY) 0 \ 2 TRA JAS TRACHELOSPERMUM JASMINOIDES - STAR JASMINE 5 GAL V2 Ol \ NOTES \ N CALIFORNIA NATIVE SPECIES 2 — � 9'B R REPLACEMENT TREE. 5 "SIGNIFICANT" TREES WILL BE REMOVED, SEE o I f p o6 'B \ ARBORIST'S REPORT. 15 REPLACEMENT TREES HAVE BEEN PROVIDED. \ A ALTERNATIVE PLANTS TO BE APPROVED BY OWNER I 4 CAM POR \ g"g \ V1 TRAIN VINE ON WALL. FOR LONICERA USE HORIZ. GALV. CABLES ±36" O.C. / I \ \ @ ATTACH CABLES TO WALL WITH HEAVY-DUTY GALV. EYE BOLTS @ 5' O.C. V2 TRAIN VINE ON FENCE / ARBOR / O \ \ / OP / y 102- \ \ 3 CER OCC \ 2 POL MUN 31-1 \ \ \ \ \/ "I� O TER O 9 \ \ INFORMAL PATH W/ � 9 MAH REP \ \ � FALLEN °14"B\ 2 TRA JAS STEPPING STONES, (0 I., SEE NOTES (TYP.) \ \ 00/13 — 11 MAH REP \ 0 J \ ARBOR W/ JASMINE EROSION CONTROL — — — _ / 6 LON HIS ° O CAM POR \ � NETTING AT 3 POL MUN � — SEE NOTES O 10"B VINE OVER GATE 8 POL MUN — 9", "B ° \ \ O DISTURBED SOIL ° 0 \ 3 RHO OCC / 4 MAH REP i ° 5 HO OCC 12"B STEPS, RAILROAD TIE W/ 0 \ \ 3 RIB VIB 4 VAC OVA 3 RHO OCC 2 2-15" \ RHO OCC (2) #4 REBAR, GRAVEL IN 1 WOO FIM 1 COR COR 5 RIB VIB ' 7 MAhC p 10" BETWEEN, TYP. \ - 8" B —FEN � 09 MAH REP � ' ' 9 0 CE, HOGWIRE ON 4x4 0 UD_ 5 POL MUN PTDF POSTS, 6' HT., SINK 2' OO 0 n 1 C OCC „ ELOW GRA 12"0 0 „B o -------- CONC. F 3 O 7 \��L6 B 15 B o — — � MUN 5 O TER " O „ 6„B RED „” "' C) O 000000 - _ I 13 CAM POR 14 0 � 9 ' 7 '.•. � - 2I I I, 9'-0" - J � 0 LANDSCAPE & IRRIGATION NOTES \ ° - - I ( � ° D O.C. 8>, I ° 1 °11 p >,B ° 4 POL MUN DRIVE • a \ FO ED RED DEFENSIBLE SPACE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT ZONE SHALL BE 30'x 30'x 50'. SEE MATRIX ° � � � FOR HAZARD POINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION NOT SHOWN HERE "R FO KED 2 'ARB UNE \> CER OC 11 • SHRUBS SHOULD BE SPACED SO THAT NO CONTINUITY EXISTS BETWEEN THE GROUND FUELS 2 WOO FIM 6 HYD MAC - I AND TREE CROWNS, SUCH THAT A GROUND FIRE WILL NOT EXTEND INTO THE TREE CANOPY. 1 ARB UNE o r 31 RHO OCC1 I 3 � • TREES SHOULD BE PLANTED SUCH THAT WHEN MATURE, THEIR CROWNS WILL BE SEPARATED 2 PRU LYO I I I RHO C BY AT LEAST 10 FEET. EXISTING TREES SHALL BE THINNED DEPENDING ON THEIR r- 3 RHO OCC I I GARAGE CONFIGURATION AND DISTANCE FROM THE HOUSES. \ I 8 0 o 1 i 5 CAI•; POR — SEE CIVIL PLANS R SIT • SEPARATE INDIVIDUAL SHRUB CROWNS BY AT LEAST TWO TIMES THE HEIGHT OR CLUMP " I WALLS &DRIVE \ 10 OPH NIG HOUSE I I 3 DAP ODO SHRUBS INTO ISLANDS OF NO GREATER THAN 18 -FT. DIAMETER. SEPARATE THE ISLANDS BY A o L — I I DISTANCE OF NO LESS THAN TWO TIMES THE CANOPY HEIGHT. \ X06" 1 ACE PAL ° 3 RHO OCC 2 C)o1 9 B • TRIM AND MAINTAIN VEGETATION WITHIN 10 FEET OF ROADWAYS AS FOR DEFENSIBLE SPACE. \ GROUND FLOOR L — — — — — — _ — \ 5 CHO 1 CER O FOR D \ \ _ 3 RIB SAN BELOW I 2 OSM FRA • TRIM TREES SO THEY DO NOT HANG LOWER THAN 15 -FT. ABOVE THE ROADWAY. I \ \ o �" — — — — — _ _ _ _ 5 POL • EXISTING LANDSCAPE WITHIN DEFENSIBLE SPACE ZONE IN IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF HOUSES h. \ 4"B TREEING SHALL BE MAINTAINED AS WIDELY SPACED TREES, SHRUBS AND GROUNDCOVERS. AREAS 3 RHO OC OF PAVEMENT OCCUR AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE HOUSE PROVIDING A FIRE SAFE I, \ 15"0 3 C o 8"B FORK BUFFER. \ FO I — _ — J -- " r. 9„13 NEW LANDSCAPING IN INTERFACE AREAS TO THE EXISTING NATIVE VEGETATION ARE 8'6 \ \ 7> 08, SELECTED FROM LOW PYROPHYTIC PLANTS, AND SPACED TO PROVIDE A FIRE SAFETY \ 7"B 5"B 0 D BUFFER, PER REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS, MARIN COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT AND MMWD FORKED 8” STANDARDS. 24 13"0 � ED "0 , O O O 3 AS CC o \ \ 00 „ 8„B ED „ \ \ RKED � � 00 FIM NEW LANDSCAPING SHALL BE SPECIMEN GARDEN„ FUEL TYPE: AWELL-MAINTAINED, o 0 IRRIGATED, ORNAMENTAL GARDEN. TREES AND SHRUBS ARE WELL SPACED OR CLUSTERED, \ \ G v U 11 B D 2-6",4"g THINNED AND FREE OF DEADWOOD. THE LAWN IS MOWED AND CLEAN. NO PYROPHYTIC 10",7"0 INFORMAL P %\ 11 O 5 VAC OVA ED FO 8 ED 12"B O CP PLANTS WITHIN 10 FT. OF HOUSE. L 12"0 F ED \ PING STONES, \ ALL PLANTER BEDS SHALL RECEIVE A 2" MIN. LAYER OF FIR BARK MULCH TOP DRESSING PER © SEE N (TYP.) 6B 0 \ \ 00 6„B 0. 4",6"B � 8"B FIRE DEPARTMENT REGULATIONS 11 »o \ 11 ,�— D ALL PLANTING AREAS WILL BE WATERED BY AN AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM � 011"0 \ FORKED _ O ,A"B 1 6„B o 6„ 12” SEPARATE IRRIGATION VALVES WILL BE PROVIDED FOR AREAS OF DIFFERENT WATER "0 \ \ M 0 O10"g REQUIREMENTS (E.G. FULL SHADE, PARTIAL SHADE, FULL SUN, ETC.) __ V TION MA ME 7"B �pNDSCgpF\ \ 10"C\ 0 9 B ENSIBL CE ZO DRIP IRRIGATION SHALL BE USED FOR ALL PLANTING AREAS 14" • NATURAL STONE OR PRECAST ROUND TO BE APPROVED BY OWNER �� P 12 0 \ REP SEEN os� NORM � o \ ?`T - o ` - — -- \ 7",6 10/31/2017 Renewal Date B 8"0 \ D o© FORKED 0 % O' N, 7/26/2017 \ RE 6"0 0 0 8"0 \ 12"0 O 9T </C. 463 7„0 14„,7, -RIM 5 MAD 9"B 11'> 6„ OF CAl\FCS FORKED 0 9"13 FORKED SCALE: I "_ 10' n n Q w w o f > z Q Z of p ocn (�f Z w F_ L`Q O Oy w U Q Ud r Cn LLJ WZ J Q w Z Q z N a- = U Z J 0 Q O 0 o z Q Q � L_r-r- LLJ <p O \ 00 N N O N I� ro r- OWN r7 `d- L0 00 N CY)L0 `t *k a) U JwN Q L LU_ z = LU � � U Q CO LU LL] Q (.0 U = U U C/) Q� 0 w J Z Q w U Q� ZLo O"t ED LI? (0L0 M M d Q Z L LO L 0 p N z Q CV O � � Z Z Q 0 L Q >_ U L L L 2i Q 0 LL LIQ > (N 0� 06 Z 0 U) Z Z J a_ O N � T � U T � Q C Y o p 0N +� Q = (n C� C) U 0 SHEET V1 OF TREE REMOVAL TABLE Tree Species DBH Notes # (in.) w 1 California bay 15 Forks a 6', old pruning wound with decay 2 California bay 9 200 downhill lean 3 California bay 11 Extensive butt rot, 450downhill lean 4 California bay 9 450downhill lean 5 California bay 14 25°downhill lean 6 California bay 8,10 Forks at 1', Fair form 7 California bay 12,15 Forks at 3', 300downhill lean 8 California bay 11 Extensive butt rot, 500downhill lean 9 Califnrnia hav 11 FxtPnsivP hitt rnt_ Fwrinwnhill IPan NOTE: SEE ARBORIST REPORT DATED MARCH 24, 2017 BY ARBORSCIENCE, P.O. BOX 111, WOODACRE, CA 94973 12"0 14" „B o o RE 6"0 0 „O 6 14",7"0 FORKED O 9"B 10" � R 8"0 8” 0 „0 O Del _ � O�'�C ` 11 N 7 ,6 � D � 1 D„ 12"0 FORKED AD O g»B o 11,> 6„ 0 9"13 FORKED ID 10' 0 10' 20' SCAL E: I "_ 10' \ FALLEN 13" B � /gypNDSCgpF , J. RFS q/QUy gnatu,e 10/31/2017 Renewal Date N 3/27/2017 Date P 9T /C. 4631 OF CAI -\F0 w N w z Q > w M w D' o z Q � Q z Q z w > O Q M Y5 U � , w z Q Q w w cn w J w n w 0 w 0 w 0 w co 0 Q 0 Q 0 Q w D' \ \ \ Q O _ N 0 N 00 N O Ln 0 � U U � J N wQ J C) �r- WLum Z (10 ry = W � of U Q O J W Q LLJ Q N U 0 LU z W Q z W U 00 Q v z ori O -q m `q LO M � M d L0 Q Q N J Q N 0- O O Q a_ L.I_ Q 2W v W ry W J LU 2 Q LU M LL N � z Q U) -p N II af CIT � T � U N Q M E cl, 'U) U N C) C SHEET ✓L OF ESTI W CD 0 ry L� 0 a_ O H PY 190 – – EXISTING GROUND _ 150 00 0 -P�°0-) O 0 09Z C 140 130 120 SECTION VIEW B -B SCALE: 1"=10' 0 01� 0 0 P50 41 12 \ _ _ ROOF PEAK 155.7' T \ \ \ _ T.O. PLATE 150.5' �,1 \ 30' GRADE OFFSET STAIRJ \ 2ND FLR 141.5' 20' GRADE OFFSET FIRST LOO 130�25',. 0 I - - G) � I o I I° O I 0 � I I g I I I I O II I I I I �I III ��i I p, I I x L.IIIII q I I B I I I L III I I I III, II I II IIII I III III II x I II I O . I III II II II II I I II ll II h Ih II I I I I I I q C1 II III II. II II I I I I 00 0 Q 0� -� 0 I � x „I I I I -Ul CC O G).. \X1 I W � - „I," .IIII I O m I, IP I � I PLAN VIEW SCALE: 1"=10' 4gOFESSIpN E.OBERgI ti � tJ w r"'i *�9 No. I 2094 �� pF C AL���� 10' 0 10' 20' SCALE. 1'70' % ro Z 0 W Ine W ci Lj 0N W rn =II QJ Q N < .Vo y, O N M Ln It ci Lj 0N W rn =II QJ N < .Vo y, —U0 U z 00 0 >Ln C V) V) 0!; 15 v)c5e Z `'-' V 0 W06 x z WWo< Z yJ ov o — O �VN00 WZON< Wm00 > z �011 m ,� QJO v >0Z ae U00 m°3: 0 0 N N Ln a1 cv W NU o z Z W W Q > LU J�0W Q — Q �V z0� °°CO Q 0 >- cG ce WU W <W 2 1 OF 1 09-143 ci Lj o Lv =II QJ N a y, = U C C � 15 V 0 SHEET 1 OF 1 09-143 o� -- --_Y E E OD . P EPEE., S 55°0 9 � �__ 5 54/E //?o � g -- % EDGE _ 0 F PAVEMENT UTLINE OF 9x22 EA � \ 0� FfHCF �0 \\�--- ----SAO 001 5' i 7"B — --- _ _ 7�> i O 12' 10' 6' S ,7 ` �\ ED S �\t`, ' --P10 143. MF 130\ ------ Ll 0 "0 2 „ 16 RK :ED 00 0 \� OF 141 I - Q) i % 5 --- .� DEAD ° 10 4' I 02 r. \ O 3' 3- 104 0-- 6 \i 5.5'/ O/ 5 a B 6„ o „B 0 ED RE 6 1 TWO EQUAL HEIGHT, 1 B SHOTCRETE RETAINING WALLS (TYPICAL) a�1 "9" 0 E 24" 08>,B o F� O 17" ,5"B ORK O " D—6",4"B � 0bL D ,141111 BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHY SHOWN HEREON IS BASED ON A SURVEY BY LAWRENCE P. DOYLE OF MILL VALLEY, CA DATED 8/1/98. AN ASSUMED ELEVATION DATUM WAS USED. o WW 0 010—" H ,y 0 \ Z M a n a U 01 0—'>s ONo� -0zE � WexWoLL as z U H O N W 21 1450 < 02 �Jpin Y>OW Lu O oe a z O L "> e °9"0 Q Z Q c E�00 �oYgOF0ESSIOVW m d d s I - Q) i % 5 --- .� DEAD ° 10 4' I 02 r. \ O 3' 3- 104 0-- 6 \i 5.5'/ O/ 5 a B 6„ o „B 0 ED RE 6 1 TWO EQUAL HEIGHT, 1 B SHOTCRETE RETAINING WALLS (TYPICAL) a�1 "9" 0 E 24" 08>,B o F� O 17" ,5"B ORK O " D—6",4"B � 0bL D ,141111 BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHY SHOWN HEREON IS BASED ON A SURVEY BY LAWRENCE P. DOYLE OF MILL VALLEY, CA DATED 8/1/98. AN ASSUMED ELEVATION DATUM WAS USED. o WW 0 010—" H ,y 0 \ Z M a n a U 01 0—'>s ONo� -0zE � WexWoLL as z U H O N W 21 1450 < 02 �Jpin Y>OW Lu O oe a z O L Q Z Q �oYgOF0ESSIOVW m d d s LEGEND `o PROPERTY LINE EASEMENT LINE a• 'E W v -- EXISTING EDGE OF PAVEMENT T9 No. 12094 CONTOURS (2' INTERVAL) CIVIL TE' OF CN�`�04' SHEET EX. HYDRANT SP1 OSP# 150.7 STORY POLE NUMBER ELEVATION 0 4' 8' 12' 16' 20' 24' OF 1 SCALE. • 1/16"= 1'-0" 09.143 SAN RAFAEL STAFF REPORT APPROVAL THE CITY WITH AMISSION ROUTING SLIP Staff Report Author: Steve Stafford Date of Meeting: 09/18/2017 Department: Community Development Topic: NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE ON A HILLSIDE AND RIDGELINE LOT Subject: REQUEST FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN REVIEW PERMITTO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW, 3,570 SQ. FT. SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE AND ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS (DRIVEWAY, RETAINING WALLS, DRAINAGE AND LANDSCAPING) ON A VACANT 94,857 SQ. FT. (2.18 -ACRE), HILLSIDE AND RIDGELINE LOT. THE PROJECT ALSO REQUESTS AN EXCEPTION FROM THE PROHIBITION TO RIDGELINE DEVELOPMENT. Type: (check all that apply) ❑ Consent Calendar ❑X Public Hearing ❑ Discussion Item ❑ Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Professional Services Agreement ❑ Informational Report *If PSA, City Attorney approval is required prior to start of staff report approval process Was agenda item publicly noticed? NX Yes NNo Date noticed: XMailed NXSite posted XNMarin IJ 9/1/17 Due Date Responsibility Description CompletedDate Initial / Comment DEPARTMENT REVIEW FRIDAY Director Director approves staff 8/23/2017 ❑X noon report is ready for ACM, Raffi B 9/1 City Attorney & Finance 8/28/2017 Paul J review. CONTENT REVIEW TUESDAY Assistant City Manager ACM, City Attorney & 9/11/2017 ❑X morning Finance will review items, RW 9/5 make edits using track 9/11/2017 City Attorney changes and ask questions ❑X using comments. Items will 9/7/2017 LG be returned to the author NX Finance by end of day Wednesday. Van Bach DEPARTMENT REVISIONS FRIDAY Author Author revises the report 9/12/2017 ❑X noon based on comments Steve S. Comments and 9/8 receives and produces a changes accepted final version (all track changes and comments removed) by Friday at noon. ACM, CITY ATTORNEY, FINANCE FINAL APPROVAL MONDAY Assistant City Manager ACM, City Attorney & 9/12/2017 ❑X morning Finance will check to see RW 9/11 their comments were 9/11/2017 City Attorney adequately addressed and ❑X sign -off for the City Click here to LG Manager to conduct the enter a date. ❑X Finance final review. Van Bach TUES City Manager Final review and approval 9/13/2017 ❑X noon Jim 9/12