HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRB 2017-08-22 #2REPORT TO DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
SUBJECT: 25 Edgewood Way — Environmental Design Review for a new retaining wall exceeding four
feet (4') in height located in the required front yard setback; APN: 010-111-34; Single Family
Residential Zoning District Hillside Overlay (R20 -H); Alex Witte, Applicant; David Maher,
Owner; Fairhills Neighborhood.
PROPERTY FACTS
Location
General Plan Designation
Zoning Designation
Existing Land -Use
Project Site:
Hillside Residential (HR)
R20 -H
Single -Family Residential
North:
Hillside Residential (HR)
R20 -H
Single -Family Residential
South:
Hillside Residential (HR)
R20 -H
Single -Family. Residential
East:
Hillside Residential (HR)
R20 -H
Single -Family Residential
West:
Open Space (OS)
P/OS
Private Open Space
Lot Size Natural State (Min.)
Required: 20,000 sf Required: 75% (27,269 sf)
Existing: 36,358 sf Proposed: 75.8% (27,573 sf)
Grading Tree Removal
Total: 42 cy Total: 1 significant tree was lost during the landslide.
Cut: 0 cy Requirement: 3 New trees
Fill: 42 cy Proposed: 7 New trees
SUMMARY
The subject property is being referred to the Board for review due to a retaining wall over four feet (4')
in height in the required front setback on a hillside parcel. The San Rafael Municipal Code (SRMC)
Section 14.16.140(A)(1)(b) (Fences and Wal/s) prohibits retaining walls over four feet (4') in height
while located within required yards, except when recommended by the Design Review Board (DRB) for
development on a hillside parcel to minimize grading and/or tree removal..
The Board's recommendation will be forwarded to staff for an action. Based on review of the applicable
design criteria, which is discussed in detail below, staff has concluded that the project adequately
addresses the applicable criteria. Staff requests that the Board review this report and provide a
recommendation on compliance with all pertinent design criteria. Specifically, staff asks the Board to
consider the following:
Materials and Colors
• Whether the proposed materials, natural colored wood and steel I -beams painted or oiled to create
a matte finish, are appropriate.
Landscaping
• The project is proposing seven (7) new trees, comprised of four (4) fruit trees and three (3) Live
Oaks, and vines (Ficus Pumila) along the proposed retaining wall. Staff is seeking feedback on
appropriateness of the proposed trees and vines to be planted.
BACKGROUND
Site Description & Setting:
The subject property is a 36,358 -sq: ft. flag lot with an average cross -slope of 50%. The property has a
steep downward slope along the west end of the property which abuts Valley View Ave and Fairhills Dr.
Despite being adjacent Valley View Ave. and Fairhills Dr. the site is accessed from Edgewood Way.
History:
Earlier this year, during the heavy rains, the site experienced a landslide. The applicants are proposing
a new retaining wall to access the site, secure the structures and protect the structures from future
landslides. During the landslide three (3)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Architecture: The retaining wall is proposed to be a natural colored wood and steel 1 -beams painted or
oiled to create a matte finish. There are also vines proposed along sections of the retaining wall.
Landscaping: During the landslide one (1) significant oak tree was lost. The applicant is proposing to
plant seven (7) new trees, four (4) of which are fruit trees, and vines planted at the base of the retaining
wall. The required trees are proposed at the base of the landslide area and the fruit trees are proposed
at the top of the retaining wall. All the landscaping will be visible from the Valley View Ave. and Fairhills
Dr. frontage.
Upon discussions with the applicant the three required trees are desired to be Live Oaks (Quercus
Agrifolia) and the vine would be Fiscus Pumila.
Grading/Drainage: The project proposes to backfill approximately 42 cubic yards behind the new
retaining wall.
ANALYSIS
General Plan 2020 Consistency:
The project is. in compliance with the land use designation of Hillside Residential (HR), in that the site is.
currently being used as a single-family residence, which the project will continue. Design criteria in the
General Plan 2020 has been implemented through the Hillside Design Guidelines Manual which have
been used to evaluate the proposed retaining wall design.
Zoning Ordinance Consistency:
Chapter 16 — Site and Use Regulations
Section 14.16.140(A)(1)(b) - Fences and walls, prohibits retaining walls over four feet (4') in
height shall not.be permitted within required yards, except when recommended by the design
review board (DRB) for development on a hillside parcel to minimize grading and/or tree
removal.
This project may not immediately minimize grading at this time, but the proposed retaining wall
is to protect the existing development from future landslides, which should minimize grading in
the long run.
2
Chapter 25 — Environmental and Design Review Permit
The project requires an administrative Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED) review as it
involves creating a new retaining wall over three feet (3') on a hillside parcel. The project is required to
go before the Board as the retaining wall is located within a required yard on a hillside lot.
The materials and colors section of the Environmental and Design Review's Review Criteria apply to
this project, this section suggests earthtone/woodtone colors and natural materials. The applicant is
proposing a wood retaining wall with vertical steel beams. The applicant has also proposed vines to
grow along sections of the wall. Staff finds that the proposal meets the intent of the chapter.
Hillside Design Guidelines
The Hillside guidelines encourages the following materials for retaining walls: colored concrete,
stone/brick, wood, and detailed wrought iron. As proposed, staff finds that the proposed retaining wall
materials, wood with steel 1 -beams in a matte finish, are appropriate.
NEIGHBORHOOD CORRESPONDENCE
Notice of hearing for the project was conducted in accordance with noticing requirements
contained in Chapter 29 of the Zoning Ordinance. A Notice of Public Hearing was mailed to all
property owners and occupants within a 300 -foot radius of the subject site, the appropriate
neighborhood group (The Fairhills Property Owners Association), and all other interested
parties, 15 calendar days prior to the date of this hearing. Additionally, notice was posted on
the site along the Edgewood Way frontage.
At the time staff's report was printed and distributed, Planning received no public comments as
a result of noticing.
CONCLUSION
Staff requests the Boards recommendations on the proposed retaining wall design and the appropriate
tree/vine plant species for the new landscaping.
EXHIBITS
1. Vicinity Maps
2. Site Photos
3. Example of Proposed Retaining Wall Design
4. Reduced Project Plans
Full-sized plans have been provided to the DRB members only.
cc: Simmonds and Associates - 330 Sir Francis Drake Blvd. Suite B, San Anselmo, CA 94960
Dave Maher - 25 Edgewood Way, San Rafael, CA 94901
j
K
Q
r+
N
X77
m
a
uo
cD
0
0
a
n
V
a
�. n
<UG C'
C rD
O 'O n �+
Q O
UO3
ID
CD
c
mn3
r+
C j 3
UQ
�. fD O
(D a
a � a
n
CL mn
C:
o
u r+
w 0
u 3
cD a
rD
n an :�
0. S
N M I
� 1
Q r+
rt O
CL 3 3
N � 7
7
O H UQ
Ar
' V1
uo
- r
lur
t. �r
LA
R rD
N
j I N n
11' UQ r- (.
c -a rr
� l<O
O
4 y �, - oo
: 3 r+ -
.. ti a I n
f m
✓'.= a n O 0
i
w 3 3 N
I'aw:�
w s 0
In_ n
CL w
rD a
rDg
• V vn D N
a ` a v
�7 a O Qj -0
N m
I r 7
`G
UQ
1-7 "
Fj
DRIUo H� EM "= �_
:1111g pf Mill gym "11 11A U BUM ���� �� ���!A MINN� q���g�� InSAI-
=moo =r o Hi mai �"$_ Ms��� Sy
spa ���g � 3� oo��m �~ � y ��o� �m=���m �"I111 11 - 1 ��9IU N _;1 o
s m 4mA ss �m Rigm Aga a9=^ �� g is Rim" $ Nil �-a 1ST IF H aa�m=� ��_ �
`� Q� � �� o� o��� �� �m��- ��a ��H � ga1m��� 1� ��g smog~��
1H Mull H8 y g� x�y og Ho Ina HH1 INIHIHI 1Ay-1mg -�
boy e� 8 � IHI �� ®�
A�� 1211111 � ��� sa �s �� ���a�mo ��R�z�,�o� �p�m��
oomo � 1,H1 in lum wso �9� , _� =maN �� �oo1 111111$1
g- � m o Ac �� Nil Pa ME Rigg= 1 s ys� 01 11 1UH US
I ego ���_ � aym�r ��� HIN ��m�=^ �
1H HT
phyl gal 111' 8 MU ill HIM OUNIN11
H1111118 � w Cpl > ni a; wok
g i_= s 2'� jog =�o s�-A U Hm g.oms
111 ���m X1_1 110 os T �� �� ��a so
ap o mga � �m r; �� o= ~ o s oN 9 to g gay W -Al gil I
MAW* �9 W � a �� ��� �� F " �$ ��� MR
ons �a� �����€_ -�� �H
~� Pte$ � avi ~�>� $ms �m m� � "�� gg��� � g � �wi am��mm r� � �
UNUM; �'€ om RE �$Sg a� n��D sa MH Owgv ��^� $ 9 ��g"=
og �Pyso Ma" -3 �$ iso m= g
mac _ ��>$�m ��9 e=�H�Ko���K� �gq= s- m1
� aman Mo 1 1st � - Is " 2mI 11$AR19 Ds-M�-gyj g
j0hylug SHIN "� � 1~ �� mo a�18 s��y � �€ _gill- _� _I �S �� _
y X09 3 0 € m' � 3 N m� moi ~� _ _ MIlI q
s MIR
9151.. , Ay,
m U M
~�m
golf! e 3
og$� nwi �_ I ,1 11111„ \�„d�'i,�,�•
HIS - O
HZ 1 N Z
i X
11 i1,i �11��,„`” S i t �
m m I „l o�oa m y m ID
U l d m N Q
o - g ��� X11 '\'\F 1 �� ez �_ (D N
lima �
, s
' o
y r O
ms a� n GI ADcv rm
�m
o m
a a 9 RA z
M� wpm
a mks .
�0 5�
H
S1 NMI
gal
EEUE 9bn'ba"�aS�c sRa �aagsf� o� a0
ID 0
�
8
m000� dE$
-mum Tz
01
Uj
a 7ZM>> - :o
3 � �' Tn � �a•'""�;� (nC� ons ¢fp �N= - _ _ani -
MO
10
5
O � � p p ^� �` �;• 5\ m� om0 IiG �rm +jJ�
~ � o
0^
Km
8� " m �
� � 0
�� �o` � z'
i
I
_:o3
1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1 5
1t 9
b
`'t It 11
I t
\ 1 t t \
e
m
1\Lv
1 1 1
1 \ 1 \ 1
I
1 1 1
1 1
1 \ M
T I
1 S N
1 1
111 11 111 i1
i 11 ; 11
/
9*`
i
4b,
1 1
1 1
1 t 5 1 1 1 11 I 1
1 1 1
1 1 1 1 \
1 1 1
E
€
a lIc
(n
9) mD�
zAo
NE 5 m
yU m �` A
'
m
_:o3
1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1 5
1t 9
11
1
B
I t
\ 1 t t \
11 t
1 1 1
1 \ 1 \ 1
I
1 1 1
1 1
1 \ M
T I
1 S N
1 1
111 11 111 i1
i 11 ; 11
_:o3
►}��� � ; �}.
> '. -� --.r
ma >
P
M Z
M (D
4 0
0
--j 0
z '0
9 z cn Cl) go (D
.