CITY OF BELVEDERE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT REPORT DATE: 4/12/16 AGENDA ITEM: 5

Save this PDF as:
 WORD  PNG  TXT  JPG

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "CITY OF BELVEDERE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT REPORT DATE: 4/12/16 AGENDA ITEM: 5"

Transcription

1 CITY OF BELVEDERE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT REPORT DATE: 4/12/16 AGENDA ITEM: 5 MEETING DATE: 4/19/16 TO: FROM: REVIEWED BY: SUBJECT: City of Belvedere Planning Commission Rebecca Markwick, Associate Planner Irene Borba, City Planner Emily Longfellow, Deputy City Attorney Design Review and Variance requests for landscape changes on the Property Located at 130 Belvedere Avenue RECOMMENDATION The applicant requests approval of Design Review and two Variance applications to allow for landscaping changes, including a sport court, new retaining walls, stairs, fencing and lighting located at 130 Belvedere A venue. The applications are included as Attachment 4 and project plans are included as Attachment 5. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission conduct the required public hearing and take the following actions: MOTION 1 MOTION2 MOTION 3 PROPERTY SUMMARY Project Address: APN: Project Applicant: Property Owner: GP Designation: Zoning: Existing Use: Adopt the Resolution granting Design Review for the property located at 130 Belvedere Avenue (Attachment 1); Adopt the Resolution granting a Variance to allow a retaining wall to exceed four feet in height in the front setback at 130 Belvedere Avenue (Attachment 2); Adopt a Resolution granting a Variance to allow a retaining wall to exceed four feet in height in the rear yard setback at 130 Belvedere Avenue (Attachment 3). 130 Belvedere A venue Rhyne Designs Landscape Beth and Oliver Jenkyn Low Density Residential SFD -1.0 to 3.0 units/net acre R15 Zoning District, Belvedere Island Single Family Residential

2 Site Characteristics: The project site is a 23,950 square-foot parcel with a moderately sloping topography. The lot is crescent shaped and follows a curve in Belvedere A venue within the RI 5 Zoning District, Belvedere Island. The site is adjacent to single family homes to the north, east and west. Belvedere A venue is located to the south. The property is developed with a two story 5,875 square foot residence and attached garage. The single family home sits to the rear of the property. The property features a rear yard, which is landscaped with trees and shrubs. The front yard is landscaped with an abundance of mature trees. 130 Belvedere Ave ZONING PARAMETERS The Zoning Parameters table is not applicable to this project, as there are no changes made to the single family dwelling or garage except for the lot coverage computation. The BMC allows for 30 percent lot coverage in the R-15 Zoning district. Specifically, section excludes uncovered and unenclosed outdoor decks located four feet or less above the average ground level beneath the deck when calculating building and structure area in computing lot coverage. A portion of the sport court is greater than 4 feet above the ground. The project proposes to add 94 SF towards the lot coverage. The total permitted lot coverage is 7, 185 SF and the house is 5,87 5 SF. With the sport court addition the total lot coverage is below the permitted 7, 185 SF. The sport court is proposed outside of the required setbacks. PROPERTY HISTORY Records indicate that the residence was constructed in The following list provides details of prior planning approvals in chronological order: Demolition, Design Review, Variance, Exception to Total Floor Area reviewed by the Planning Commission for a new single family dwelling. The application was continued due to neighbors concerns regarding the height of the structure Demolition, Design Review, Variance, Exception to Total Floor Area reviewed by the Planning Commission for a new single family dwelling. The Planning Commission approved the Exception to Total Floor Area and a Variance, however the accompanying Design Review application was denied Planning Commission approval of Design Review and Exception to Total Floor Area for a 1,687 SF addition to the existing single family dwelling mostly excavated into the hillside, to gain the additional floor area Planning Commission approval of Design Review and Exception to Total Floor Area for a 220 SF addition, bringing the floor area up to 5,875 SF. 130 Belvedere Avenue April 19, 2016 Planning Commission meeting Page 2

3 2015- Design Review Exception approval for the removal of four trees, three Pine trees and one Incense Cedar Design Review Exception approval for new balcony and deck guardrails, replacement of existing deck and balcony with IPE decking, skim coat over T-11 siding with plaster painted grey, new stairway from the south deck to the lower level yard, and replacement of gate and fence next to the garage. PROJECT ANALYSIS The applicant requests Planning Commission review and approval of the following entitlements: Design Review and two Variance applications. The applicant proposes new landscaping for the entire property including new hardscape, retaining walls, fencing, lighting, planting and irrigation. The design is intended to enhance the existing site and provide useable outdoor space for the homeowners. The project architect has provided a project narrative as part of the application (Attachment 4). The project proposes a new path from the driveway to the front door. The driveway is proposed to be repaved with concrete. A new board form concrete retaining wall is proposed along the right side of the driveway, a portion of which will exceed the allowable 4 feet in height in the front yard setback (See Variance section below). Seven wall mounted down lights are proposed in the retaining wall, and path lights are proposed along the driveway and in the entry area of the house. A garbage can enclosure is proposed adjacent to the garage. A new 40 foot board formed concrete retaining wall is proposed in the rear yard setback, the wall measures from 4 feet to 7 feet 4 inches in height (See Variance section below). Due to the natural sloping nature of the hillside and the location of the existing house, the retaining wall is necessary to create a walkway and entry way for the property owners. A new bluestone path is proposed adjacent to the retaining wall that leads to the entry way which is also proposed in bluestone. A new water feature is proposed in the entry way of the house. Unique to this single family home, the entry way to the home is at the upslope of the hill and at the rear of the home. A new fence and gate are proposed at the rear of the house that opens to a stone paving strip walkway and a path that leads down to the existing lawn area at the lower level of the home. The existing lawn area will remain, and adjacent to the lawn area a new bluestone patio on the lower terrace is proposed. On the west side of the lawn a new concrete staircase is proposed that leads to a sport court. Sport Court The sport court is proposed in the lower portion of the lot in the southwest corner. The sport court measures 874 square feet and 6 inches. A 10 foot by 20 foot tennis backboard is proposed along one side, and will measure 15 feet 6 inches in height from grade at this wall. Along the front wall of the tennis court which faces Belvedere A venue a woven wire mesh with a steel post railing measuring 3 feet 6 inches is proposed on top of a board form concrete retaining wall. The railing will match the lower terrace railing which provide continuity if viewing from Belvedere Avenue. Additionally along this frontage a black mesh with steel frame "wall" is proposed. The wall will measure 10 feet from the retaining wall and 15 feet from grade. The sport court is proposed to be heavily screened on all three sides, and special attention is paid to the street in terms of landscaping. 130 Belvedere Avenue April 19, 2016 Planning Commission meeting Page 3

4 Landscaping All existing trees are proposed to remain except for the removal of the following eleven trees: 1. Five inch Apple 2. Twelve inch Western Cedar 3. Fourteen inch Coast Live Oak 4. Nine inch Coast Live Oak 5. Thirteen inch Coast Live Oak 6. Four inch Strawberry Tree 7. Six in Strawberry Tree 8. Eight inch Strawberry Tree 9. Ten inch Western Red Cedar 10. Six inch Coast Live Oak 11. Eight inch Western Red Cedar The majority of the trees proposed for removal are to accommodate the proposed sport court. Trees, shrubs, grasses, ground covers, and perennials are proposed to be planted to help screen and soften the sport court. The most significant trees proposed for planting are three, forty eight ( 48) inch box Coast Live Oak. The three Coast Live Oaks are proposed in a similar area to where the existing trees are proposed for removal around the sport court. The project proposes a well thought out design and a wide variety and quantity of plantings.. Ligltting There are 67 lights proposed throughout the property. The lights consist of low voltage path lights, wall mounted down lights, and step lights. All lights are proposed to be down lit and covered. DESIGN REVIEW The Design Review findings, specified in Belvedere Municipal Code Title 20, state that all new structures and additions should be designed to avoid excessively large dwellings that are out of character with their setting or with other dwellings in the neighborhood. All buildings should be designed to relate to, and fit in, with others in the neighborhood and should not attract attention to themselves. To avoid monotony or an impression of bulk, large expanses of any one material on a single plane should be avoided. Vertical and horizontal elements should be used to add architectural variety, to break up building planes, and to avoid monotony. Landscaping should also soften and screen structures and maintain privacy. The proposed project includes a new sport court and landscaping throughout the property. The following design review findings can be made. Preservation of existing site conditions. To preserve the landscape in its natural state, the removal of trees, vegetation, rock, and soil should be kept to a minimum. Projects should be designed to minimize cut and fill areas, and grade changes should be minimized and kept in harmony with the general appearance of the neighboring landscape. The entire property has been developed with a single family home and attached garage. The existing landscaping will be removed and the landscaping proposed will enhance the property. The 11 trees that are proposed for removal are offset by the addition of 3 Coast Live Oak and the abundance of landscaping proposed for the project. Minimal grading is 130 Belvedere Avenue April 19, 2016 Planning Commission meeting Page4

5 proposed for the sport court and the retaining walls. The proposed landscaping is in harmony with the appearance of the existing neighborhood. Relationship between structures and the site. There should be a balanced and harmonious relationship among the structures on the site, between the structures and the site itself, and between the structures and those on adjoining properties. All new buildings or additions constructed on sloping land should be designed to relate to the natural land-forms and step with the slope in order to minimize the building mass and bulk and to integrate the structure with the site. The project proposal maintains a balanced and harmonious relationship between the structure and its site and adjoining properties because the proposed sport court and landscaping have been designed to relate to and fit with the existing neighborhood. The sport court design is designed in such a manner to relate to the natural slope of the site which will minimize bulk and mass. The sport court will appear balanced and harmonious with the existing single family dwelling and the site itself. Minimizing bulk and mass. A. All new structures and additions should be designed to avoid monumental or excessively large dwellings that are out of character with their setting or with other dwellings in the neighborhood. All buildings should be designed to relate to and fit in with others in the neighborhood and not designed to draw attention to themselves. There are no changes proposed to the exterior of the existing single family home, therefore there are no changes to the bulk and mass of the home. The sport court that is proposed is 874 square feet and 6 inches. The sport court will not appear to be monumental or out of character with the neighborhood as it is not excessively large. The sport court is designed to relate to and fit in with the others in the neighborhood. The sport court will be heavily screened with new plantings which will help soften the appearance. B. To avoid monotony or an impression of bulk, large expanses of any one material on a single plane should be avoided, and large single plane retaining walls should be avoided. Vertical and horizontal elements should be used to add architectural variety, to break up building planes, and to avoid monotony. The proposed project is designed so that it does not include large expanses of any one material. There are many different types of plantings proposed, including many varieties of trees, shrubs, grasses, groundcovers and perennials. The retaining walls proposed are proposed in board form concrete and are proposed to be screened by the variety of plantings. The sport court is proposed in mesh walls, wire railing to be painted grey, and board form concrete which will help avoid monotony. In addition, the proposed colors and material will blend with the surrounding neighborhood. Further, the proposed sport court would not increase the impression of bulk due to its location on the lot and the abundance of proposed landscaping and existing trees which will provide natural screening. 130 Belvedere Avenue April 19, 2016 Planning Commission meeting Page 5

6 Materials and colors used. Building designs should incorporate materials and colors that minimize the structures visual impacts, that blends with the existing landforms and vegetative cover, that relate to and fit in with structures in the neighborhood, and that do not attract attention to the structures themselves. Soft and muted colors in the earthtone and woodtone ranges are preferred and generally should predominate. Trim and window colors should be compatible with and complementary to the other building colors. The proposed materials, wood and wire fencing, wood fencing, board formed concrete retaining walls, and nylon black mesh for the sport court are appropriate for the property in that they are quality materials that blend in well with the surrounding properties. The color palate for the project includes browns, grays and black. The colors and materials for the project are soft and muted and will complement the surrounding neighborhood without drawing attention to the proposed project. Fences and screening. A. Fences and physical screening should be located so as to be compatible with the design of the site and structures as a whole, should conceal and screen garbage areas, mechanical equipment, and structural elements from public view, should preserve privacy between adjoining dwellings, where practical, and should not significantly block views. The project includes construction of a new wood and wire fence along the front and side property lines. The wood and wire fencing is proposed to be 6 feet in height, in addition a new entry gate and fence is proposed at the rear of the house. A trash enclosure is proposed adjacent to the garage to conceal and screen the garbage cans. Planting is proposed throughout the property, 11 pittosporum are proposed in front of the sport court. The newly proposed fence would not block views from the neighboring property and the additional landscaping will enhance the curb appeal of the residence. The retaining wall proposed at the rear of the property is compatible with the design of the site and the existing single family dwelling. The retaining wall at the rear of the property will not block neighbor's views as it will not be visible by the adjacent neighbors. Privacy. Building placement, and window size and placement should be selected to give consideration to the privacy of adjacent buildings. There are no new windows proposed with this application. The sport court is placed close to Belvedere A venue, outside of the required setbacks. The sport court is placed in such a space that will be visible from Belvedere A venue however there are no dwellings in the vicinity that will be impacted by the sport court. Additionally there are many plants proposed to screen the sport court from pedestrians walking on Belvedere A venue. Drives, parking and circulation. Walkways, driveways, curb cuts and off-street parking should be planned and designed so as to minimize interference with smooth traffic flow, to encourage separation of pedestrian from vehicular traffic, and to be as safe and convenient as is practical. They should not be out of relationship with the design of the proposed buildings and structures on the site, and should not intrude on the privacy of, or conflict with the appearance or use of neighboring properties. There is no change to the layout of the existing driveway or garage. driveway will remain in the same location. The existing 130 Belvedere Avenue April 19, 2016 Planning Commission meeting Page 6

7 Exterior lighting, skylights, and reflectivity. Exterior lighting should not create glare, hazard, or annoyance to neighboring property owners or to passersby. Lighting should be shielded and directed downward, with location of lights coordinated with the approved landscape plan. Skylights should not have white or light opaque exterior lenses. Proposed exterior lighting includes low voltage path lights, wall mounted down lights, and step lights mounted to railings in the sport comi. The exterior wall mounted lights and step lights are appropriate for the architectural style of the home provided that the light source is shielded. As such, the lighting will not create glare, hazard, or annoyance to neighboring property owners or passersby. Consideration of nonconformities. The proposed work shall be viewed in relationship to any nonconformities, as defined in Title 19, and where it is determined to be feasible and reasonable, consideration should be given to conditioning the approval upon the mitigation or elimination of such nonconformities. The existing single family home is a nonconforming structure, it encroaches into the rear setback and exceeds the allowable square footage of 4,850 SF. The encroachment into the rear setback was established when the house was built in As this project does not propose an addition to the single family dwelling staff finds no reason to correct the rear yard setback nonconformity. The Planning Commission approved an Exception to Total Floor Area in 2009 and the square footage is not changing. square footage would not be considered a non-conformity. There are two Variance applications as part of the proposed project which include the height of retaining walls in the front and rear yards. Given the slope of the lot and the placement of the retaining walls Staff is recommending approval of the Variance applications. It is not feasible or reasonable to mitigate or eliminate these nonconformities. Landscape plans -- Purpose. A. Landscape plans should be compatible with the character of the site and surrounding developed properties. Native or natural appearing vegetation, with generally rounded, natural forms, should be placed to appear as loose, informal clusters. B. Landscape plans shall include appropriate planting to soften or screen the appearance of structures as seen from off-site locations and shall include appropriate screening for architectural elements, such as building foundations, deck supports, and retaining walls, that cannot be mitigated through architectural design. C. Landscape plans should provide privacy between properties. Choice of landscape materials should take into consideration the future impact which new planting may have in significantly obstructing views from nearby dwellings. The proposed project includes new landscaping throughout the property. The landscaping is in substantial conformance with this finding as it includes natural and native vegetation, is compatible with the character of the site and the surrounding properties, and is designed to provide screening of the sport court. Landscape Plans - Materials. A. Plant materials native to northern California and Marin County, and those that are drought-tolerant are encouraged. Evergreen species are encouraged for use in screen planting situations. Because of high water usage, turf areas 130 Belvedere Avenue April 19, 2016 Planning Commission meeting Page 7

8 should be minimized and narrow turn areas, such as in parking strips, should be avoided. B. Landscape plans should include a mix of fast and slow growing plant materials. Fast growing trees that have a short life span should be used only when planted with others which reach maturity at a later age. C. Landscape plans should include water conserving irrigation systems. Plant materials should be selected so that once established, much of the major site landscaping would survive solely on rainfall. The proposed landscape is in substantial conformance with this finding as it includes new planting areas, which are low water use and include slow and fast growing species. VARIAN CE ONE The applicant requests Planning Commission consideration and approval of a Variance from Section of the Belvedere Municipal Code to exceed the maximum allowable height of a retaining wall in a setback. The maximum allowable height of retaining walls is 4 feet in the setback. As proposed, the applicant is requesting height of 7' 4" in the rear yard setback. In order to grant the Variance, the Planning Commission must make the following findings as noted below followed by staffs response: 1. The granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which such property is situated; Granting a height variance for a retaining wall will not grant a special privilege to this particular lot due to the slope of the lot and the location of the existing single family dwelling. The path to the front door travels into the rear yard setback between the house and a steep slope, requiring a retaining wall that is tall enough to retain the slope. It is not considered a special privilege to have a walkway to the front door of the house, and to have a retaining wall stabilize the dirt adjacent to the walkway, as many other property owners in the vicinity enjoy such benefits. Given the steepness of the lot and the existing conditions of the single family dwelling, granting a Variance is not considered a special privilege, since it will allow the property owners to a build a retaining wall at the entrance to their house; a privilege enjoyed by all homes in the area. Because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance section would deprive this property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification, so that a denial of the application would result in undue property loss; The special circumstances applicable to the property are the topography and the shape of the lot. This is a very steeply sloping lot and the entrance to the house is at the top and rear of the property. A retaining wall greater than four feet in height is needed to connect the driveway walkway to the front door of the house. Without the tall retaining wall the path from the driveway to the front entrance would be extremely steep and hazardous. The strict application of the height requirements for retaining walls would deprive the owners of the ability to enjoy an entry way similar to that enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity under identical zoning classifications. 130 Belvedere Avenue April 19, 2016 Planning Commission meeting Page 8

9 2. The granting of this Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements of owners of other premises, or to the quiet enjoyment of their premises. The granting of the Variance for retaining wall height in the rear yard will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements of owners of other premises, as all construction will be governed by the uniform Building Code requirements as well as regulations restricting the construction impacts. Staff believes that the findings as included in the Draft Resolution (Attachment 2) and as noted above can be made for the retaining wall height Variance. VARIAN CE TWO The applicant requests Planning Commission consideration and approval of a Variance from Section of the Belvedere Municipal Code to exceed the maximum allowable height of a retaining wall in a setback. The maximum allowable height of retaining walls is 4 feet in the setback. As proposed, the applicant is requesting height of 5 feet in the front yard setback. In order to grant the Variance, the Planning Commission must make the following findings as noted below followed by staffs response: 1. The granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which such property is situated; Granting a height variance for a retaining wall will not grant a special privilege to this particular lot due to the slope of the lot and the location of the existing driveway for the single family dwelling. The project does not propose to change the driveway location, instead proposes to make the driveway safer with a taller retaining wall. Additionally, only 22 feet of the retaining wall will exceed the allowable height of 4 feet. It is not considered a special privilege to have a driveway that is safe and not covered in dirt due to an insufficient height of a retaining wall, as many other property owners in the vicinity enjoy such benefits. Given the steepness of the lot and the existing conditions of the single family dwelling, granting a Variance is not considered a special privilege, since it will allow the property owners to a build a retaining wall that will allow access to their garage; a privilege enjoyed by all homes in the area. 2. Because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance section would deprive this property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification, so that a denial of the application would result in undue property loss; The special circumstances applicable to the property are the topography and the shape. This is a very steeply sloping lot and the driveway off of Belvedere A venue is also very steep. A retaining wall greater than four feet in height is needed to connect the driveway to the garage. Without the tall retaining wall there is potential for continued drainage problems and back fill to end up on Belvedere A venue and the driveway (See Attachment 4, Letter from Allen Dadafarin, P.E.). The strict application of the height requirements for retaining walls would deprive the owners of the ability to enjoy a 130 Belvedere Avenue April 19, 2016 Planning Commission meeting Page9

10 driveway way similar to that enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity under identical zoning classifications. 3. The granting of this Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements of owners of other premises, or to the quiet enjoyment of their premises. The granting of the Variance for a retaining wall to exceed four feet in height will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements of owners of other premises, as all construction will be governed by the uniform Building Code requirements as well as regulations restricting the construction impacts. Staff believes that the findings as included in the Draft Resolution (Attachment 6) and as noted above can be made for the retaining wall variance. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION The project applications have been reviewed under the provlslons of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations. The proposed project was determined to be categorically exempt based on the following: Design Review PermitNariance applications - Exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section of the CEQA Guidelines - Class 3, which allows the construction of accessory structures and Section of the CEQA Guidelines- Class 4, Minor Alterations to Land, which allows for new landscaping. Additionally, the project is exempt from CEQA by the Common Sense Exemption, CEQA Guideline section (b )(3 ),as it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the project would have a significant effect on the environment; CEQA provides certain exceptions where categorical exemptions may not be used. Under one such exception, a CEQA categorical exemption may not be used ifthe project has the potential to cause a substantial adverse effect on a CEQA Tribal Cultural Resource. Here a categorical exemption is appropriate because there is no potential that the project would cause a substantial adverse effect on any potential Tribal Cultural Resources that may, or may not, exist on the site. As mentioned above, the project is exempted from CEQA by the Common Sense Exemption. If it can be seen with certainty that a project will not have a significant effect on the environment, it is exempt from CEQA review. (CEQA Guidelines, 1506l(b)(3).) Here, the project was reviewed by an archeologist and has resulted in a negative finding for the site. Therefore, there is no possibility that any potential Tribal Cultural Resources that may, or may not, exist on the site would be adversely affected City action on the applications is required by June 19, 2016 or the project may be deemed approved. CORRESPONDENCE A copy of the public hearing notice for this item was published in The ARK newspaper and mailed to all property owners within 300 feet of the subject property. As of writing this report, staff has received two letters of support for the project from the owners of 121 Belvedere and 130 Belvedere A venue. 130 Belvedere Avenue April 19, 2016 Planning Commission meeting Page 10

11 CONCLUSION Staff believes that the findings can be made for the Design Review and two Variance requests. As stated in the Design Review findings, staff finds that the proposed sport court and landscaping includes the use of materials compatible with the architecture of the neighborhood, the mass and bulk of the proposed sport court and landscaping blends in well with the existing neighborhood. Accordingly, staff has prepared a Resolution recommending approval of a Design Review and Two Variance applications for the residence. RECOMMENDATION MOTION 1 MOTION2 MOTION3 ATTACHMENTS Adopt the Resolution granting Design Review for the property located at 130 Belvedere Avenue (Attachment 1); Adopt the Resolution granting a height Variance for a 8 foot retaining wall in the rear yard setback where 4 feet is permitted for the property located at 130 Belvedere Avenue (Attachment 2). Adopt the Resolution granting a height Variance for a 5 foot retaining wall in the front yard setback where 4 feet is permitted for the property located at 130 Belvedere Avenue (Attachment 3). Attachment 1 : Attachment 2: Attachment 3: Attachment 4: Attachment 5: Attachment 6: Draft Resolution for Design Review Draft Resolution for Rear Yard Variance Draft Resolution for Front Yard Variance Project Application Project Plans Correspondence 130 Belvedere Avenue April 19, 2016 Planning Commission meeting Page 11

12 CITY OF BELVEDERE RESOLUTION NO A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF BELVEDERE GRANTING DESIGN REVIEW APPROVAL FOR A SPORT COURT AND LANDSCAPING AT THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 130 BELVEDERE A VENUE WHEREAS, a proper application has been submitted for Design Review pursuant to Title 20 of the Belvedere Municipal Code to build a sport court and make landscape changes to the property at 130 Belvedere Avenue; and WHEREAS, the project been determined to be categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303, of the CEQA Guidelines - Class 3, which allows the construction of accessory structures and Section of the CEQA Guidelines- Class 4, Minor Alterations to Land, which allows for new landscaping. Additionally, the project is exempt from CEQA by the Common Sense Exemption, CEQA Guideline section 1506l(b)(3),as it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the project would have a significant effect on the environment; CEQA provides certain exceptions where categorical exemptions may not be used. Under one such exception, a CEQA categorical exemption may not be used if the project has the potential to cause a substantial adverse effect on a CEQA Tribal Cultural Resource. Here a categorical exemption is appropriate because there is no potential that the project would cause a substantial adverse effect on any potential Tribal Cultural Resources that may, or may not, exist on the site. As mentioned above, the project is exempted from CEQA by the Common Sense Exemption. If it can be seen with certainty that a project will not have a significant effect on the environment, it is exempt from CEQA review. (CEQA Guidelines, 1506l(b)(3).) Here, the project was reviewed by an archeologist and has resulted in a negative finding for the site. Therefore, there is no possibility that any potential Tribal Cultural Resources that may, or may not, exist on the site would be adversely affected; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a properly noticed hearing on April 19, 2016;and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds based upon the findings set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein, that with the conditions listed below, the proposed project is in substantial conformance with the Design Review criteria specified in Section and to of the Belvedere Municipal Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Belvedere does hereby grant approval of the Design Review application pursuant to Title 20 of the Belvedere Municipal Code to renovate the existing residence with the following conditions: ATTACHMENT 1

13 Resolution Belvedere A venue April 19, 2016 Page 2 a) The property owner shall hold the City of Belvedere and its officers harmless in the event of any legal action related to or arising from the granting of this Design Review approval, shall cooperate with the City in the defense of any such action, and shall indemnify the City for any award of damages and/or attorneys' fees and associated costs that may result. This approval is conditioned upon the accuracy of all facts stated in the application and supporting documents. b) Construction shall conform to the drawings prepared by Rhyne Designs Landscape Architecture stamped received by the City of Belvedere on April 11, c) Construction shall be limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except in special circumstances after obtaining written permission from the City Manager. d) All requirements of the City Engineer shall be met. Encroachment permits, as distinguished from a Building Permit, shall be obtained prior to commencing work in the City right-of-way. e) For projects that affect site drainage, a preliminary drainage plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a building permit. f) All requirements of the Fire Marshal shall be met. Vegetation on this parcel shall comply with the requirements of the Tiburon Fire Protection District and the recommendations of Fire Safe Marin. CFC g) All exterior lighting shall be shielded and directed downward. h) The general contractor shall submit a proposal to the City Manager, for review and approval, addressing the schedule for construction and parking locations for construction vehicles. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall update the Construction Management Plan to the satisfaction of the. Building Official. i) Plans submitted to the Building Department for permit issuance shall be consistent with the approved Planning Commission plans. j) Design Review approvals expire eighteen (18) months from the date of approval. This Design Review approval expires on October 19, k) Construction shall be completed within the Construction Time Limit established for this project. 1) In the event unanticipated archaeological or paleontological resources are uncovered during construction, all work must be halted and an evaluation must be undertaken by a qualified archaeologist or paleontologist to identify the appropriate actions that shall be undertaken. m) These Conditions of Approval shall be printed on the Building Permit Construction Plan set of drawings. n) These restrictions shall be binding upon any successor in interest of the prope1iy. o) Prior to the issuance of a building permit the property owner shall demonstrate compliance with State/BAAQMD air quality requirements related to the dust generated by grading and construction

14 Resolution Belvedere Avenue April 19, 2016 Page 3 p) Prior to issuance of a building permit and where required by the City of Belvedere Municipal Code Section D., Pem1anent stormwater controls for new and redevelopment, the applicant shall develop, submit and implement an approved Stom1water Control Plan (SCP) that follows the appropriate template in the most recent version of the Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association (BASMAA) Post Construction Manual. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Belvedere Planning Commission on April 19, 2016, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: RECUSED: APPROVED: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Marsha Lasky, Planning Commission Chair Alison Foulis, City Clerk

15 Resolution Belvedere Avenue January 19, 2016 Exhibit A Page 1 Preservation of existing site conditions. To preserve the landscape in its natural state, the removal of trees, vegetation, rock, and soil should be kept to a minimum. Projects should be designed to minimize cut and fill areas, and grade changes should be minimized and kept in harmony with the general appearance of the neighboring landscape. The entire property has been developed with a single family home and attached garage. The existing landscaping will be removed and the landscaping proposed will enhance the property. The 11 trees that are proposed for removal are offset by the addition of 3 Coast Live Oaks and the abundance of landscaping proposed for the project. Minimal grading is proposed for the sport court and the retaining walls. The proposed landscaping is in haimony with the appearance of the existing neighborhood. Relationship between structures and the site. There should be a balanced and harmonious relationship among the structures on the site, between the structures and the site itself, and between the structures and those on adjoining properties. All new buildings or additions constructed on sloping land should be designed to relate to the natural land-forms and step with the slope in order to minimize the building mass and bulk and to integrate the structure with the site. The project proposal maintains a balanced and harmonious relationship between the structure and its site and adjoining properties because the proposed sport court and landscaping have been designed to relate to and fit with the existing neighborhood. The sport court design is designed in such a manner to relate to the natural slope of the site which will minimize bulk and mass. The sport court will appear balanced and harmonious with the existing single family dwelling and the site itself. Minimizing bulk and mass. A. All new structures and additions should be designed to avoid monumental or excessively large dwellings that are out of character with their setting or with other dwellings in the neighborhood. All buildings should be designed to relate to and fit in with others in the neighborhood and not designed to draw attention to themselves. There are no changes proposed to the exterior of the existing single family home, therefore there are no changes to the bulk and mass of the home. The sport court that is proposed is 874 square feet and 6 inches. The sport court will not appear to be monumental or out of character with the neighborhood as it is not excessively large. The sport court is designed to relate to and fit in with the others in the neighborhood. The sport court will be heavily screened with new plantings which will help soften the appeai ance.

16 Resolution Belvedere Avenue January 19, 2016 Exhibit A Page 2 B. To avoid monotony or an impression of bulk, large expanses of any one material on a single plane should be avoided, and large single plane retaining walls should be avoided. Vertical and horizontal elements should be used to add architectural variety, to break up building planes, and to avoid monotony. The proposed project is designed so that it does not include large expanses of any one material. There are many different types of plantings proposed, including many varieties of trees, shrubs, grasses, groundcovers and perennials. The retaining walls proposed are proposed in board form concrete and are proposed to be screened by the variety of plantings. The sport court is proposed in mesh walls, wire railing to be painted grey, and board form concrete which will help avoid monotony. In addition, the proposed colors and material will blend with the surrounding neighborhood. Further, the proposed sport court would not increase the impression of bulk due to its location on the lot and the abundance of proposed landscaping and existing trees which provide natural screening. Materials and colors used. Building designs should incorporate materials and colors that minimize the structures visual impacts, that blends with the existing landforms and vegetative cover, that relate to and fit in with structures in the neighborhood, and that do not attract attention to the structures themselves. Soft and muted colors in the earthtone and woodtone ranges are preferred and generally should predominate. Trim and window colors should be compatible with and complementary to the other building colors. The proposed materials, wood and wire fencing, wood fencing, board formed concrete retaining walls, and nylon black mesh for the sport court are appropriate for the property in that they are quality materials that blend in well with the surrounding properties. The color palate for the project includes browns, grays and black. The colors and materials for the project are soft and muted and will complement the surrounding neighborhood without drawing attention to the proposed project. Fences and screening. A. Fences and physical screening should be located so as to be compatible with the design of the site and structures as a whole, should conceal and screen garbage areas, mechanical equipment, and structural elements from public view, should preserve privacy between adjoining dwellings, where practical, and should not significantly block views. The project includes construction of a new wood and wire fence along the front and side property lines. The wood and wire fencing is proposed to be 6 feet in height, in addition a new entry gate and fence proposed at the rear of the house. A trash enclosure is proposed adjacent to the garage to conceal and screen the garbage cans. Planting is proposed throughout the property, 11 pittosporum are proposed in front of the sport court. The newly proposed fence would not block views from the neighboring property and the additional landscaping will enhance

17 Resolution Belvedere A venue January 19, 2016 Exhibit A Page 3 the curb appeal of the residence. The retaining wall proposed at the rear of the property is compatible with the design of the site and the existing single family dwelling. The retaining wall at the rear of the property will not block neighbors views as it will not be visible by the adjacent neighbors. Privacy. Building placement, and window size and placement should be selected to give consideration to the privacy of adjacent buildings. There are no new windows proposed with this application. The sport court is placed close to Belvedere A venue, outside of the required setbacks. The sport court is placed in such a space that will be visible from Belvedere A venue however there are no dwellings in the vicinity that will be impacted by the sp011 court. Additionally there are many plants proposed to screen the sport court from pedestrians walking on Belvedere A venue. Drives, parking and circulation. Walkways, driveways, curb cuts and off-street parking should be planned and designed so as to minimize interference with smooth traffic flow, to encourage separation of pedestrian from vehicular traffic, and to be as safe and convenient as is practical. They should not be out of relationship with the design of the proposed buildings and structures on the site, and should not intrude on the privacy of, or conflict with the appearance or use of neighboring properties. There is no change to the layout of the existing driveway or garage. The existing driveway will remain in the same location. Exterior lighting, skylights, and reflectivity. Exterior lighting should not create glare, hazard, or annoyance to neighboring property owners or to passersby. Lighting should be shielded and directed downward, with location of lights coordinated with the approved landscape plan. Skylights should not have white or light opaque exterior lenses. Proposed exterior lighting includes low voltage path lights, wall mounted down lights, and step lights mounted to railings in the sport com1. The exterior wall mounted lights and step lights are appropriate for the architectural style of the home provided that the light source is shielded. As such, the lighting will not create glare, hazard, or annoyance to neighboring property owners or passersby. Consideration of nonconformities. The proposed work shall be viewed in relationship to any nonconformities, as defined in Title 19, and where it is determined to be feasible and reasonable, consideration should be given to conditioning the approval upon the mitigation or elimination of such nonconformities. The existing single family home is a nonconforming structure, it encroaches into the rear setback and exceeds the allowable square footage of 4,850 SF. The encroachment into the rear setback was established when the house was built in As this project does not propose an addition to the single family dwelling

18 Resolution Belvedere Avenue January 19, 2016 Exhibit A Page4 staff finds no reason to correct the rear yard setback nonconformity. The Planning Commission approved an Exception to Total Floor Area in 2009 and since the square footage is remaining the same then the existing square footage would not be considered a nonconformity. There are two Variance applications as part of the proposed project which include the height of retaining walls in the front and rear yards. Given the slope of the lot and the placement of the retaining walls Staff is recommending approval of the Variance applications. It is not feasible or reasonable to mitigate or eliminate these nonconformities. Landscape plans -- Purpose. A. Landscape plans should be compatible with the character of the site and surrounding developed properties. Native or natural appearing vegetation, with generally rounded, natural forms, should be placed to appear as loose, informal clusters. B. Landscape plans shall include appropriate planting to soften or screen the appearance of structures as seen from off-site locations and shall include appropriate screening for architectural elements, such as building foundations, deck supports, and retaining walls, that cannot be mitigated through architectural design. C. Landscape plans should provide privacy between properties. Choice of landscape materials should take into consideration the future impact which new planting may have in significantly obstructing views from nearby dwellings. The proposed project includes new landscaping throughout the property. The landscaping is in substantial conformance with this finding as it includes natural and native vegetation, is compatible with the character of the site and the surrounding properties, and is designed to provide screening of the sport court. Landscape Plans - Materials. A. Plant materials native to northern California and Marin County, and those that are drought-tolerant are encouraged. Evergreen species are encouraged for use in screen planting situations. Because of high water usage, turf areas should be minimized and narrow turn areas, such as in parking strips, should be avoided. B. Landscape plans should include a mix of fast and slow growing plant materials. Fast growing trees that have a short life span should be used only when planted with others which reach maturity at a later age. C. Landscape plans should include water conserving irrigation systems. Plant materials should be selected so that once established, much of the major site landscaping would survive solely on rainfall. The proposed landscape is in substantial conformance with this finding as it includes new planting areas, which are low water use and include slow and fast.. growmg species.

19 CITY OF BELVEDERE RESOLUTION NO A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF BELVEDERE GRANTING A VARIANCE FROM SECTION OF THE BELVEDERE MUNICIPAL CODE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 130 BELVEDERE WHEREAS, a proper application has been submitted for a Variance from of the Belvedere Municipal Code to allow a retaining wall height of 5', and the maximum allowable height is 4' from Existing Grade, at the property at 130 Belvedere Avenue; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission made the following findings of fact: 1. The granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which such property is situated; Granting a height variance for a retaining wall will not grant a special privilege to this particular lot due to the slope of the lot and the location of the existing driveway for the single family dwelling. The project does not propose to change the driveway location, instead proposes to make the driveway safer with a taller retaining wall. Additionally, only 22 feet of the retaining wall will exceed the allowable height of 4 feet. It is not considered a special privilege to have a driveway that is safe and not covered in dirt due to an insufficient height of a retaining wall, as many other property owners in the vicinity enjoy such benefits. Given the steepness of the lot and the existing conditions of the single family dwelling, granting a Variance is not considered a special privilege, since it will allow the property owners to a build a retaining wall that will allow access to their garage; a privilege enjoyed by all homes in the area. 2. Because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance section would deprive this property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification, so that a denial of the application would result in undue property loss; The special circumstances applicable to the property are the topography and the shape. This is a very steeply sloping lot and the driveway off of Belvedere A venue is also very steep. A retaining wall greater than four feet in height is needed to connect the driveway to the garage. Without the tall retaining wall there is potential for continued drainage problems and back fill to end up on Belvedere A venue and the driveway (See Attachment 3, Letter from Allen Dadafarin, P.E.). The strict application of the height requirements for retaining walls would deprive the owners of the ability to enjoy a driveway way similar to that enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity under identical zoning classifications. 3. The granting of this Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements of owners of other premises, or to the quiet enjoyment of their premises. The granting of the Variance for a retaining wall to exceed four feet in height will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements of owners of other premises, as all construction will be governed by the ATTACHMENT 2

20 Resolution Belvedere Avenue April 19, 2016 Page 2 Uniform Building Code requirements as well as regulations restricting the constrnction impacts. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Belvedere Planning Commission on April 19, 2016, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: RECUSED: Marsha Lasky, Planning Commission Chair Alison Foulis, City Clerk

21 CITY OF BELVEDERE RESOLUTION NO A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF BELVEDERE GRANTING A VARIANCE FROM SECTION OF THE BELVEDERE MUNICIPAL CODE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 130 BELVEDERE WHEREAS, a proper application has been submitted for a Variance from of the Belvedere Municipal Code to allow a retaining wall height of 8' where 4' is required, and the maximum allowable height is 4' from Existing Grade, at the property at 130 Belvedere Avenue; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission made the following findings of fact: 1. The granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which such property is situated; Granting a height variance for a retaining wall will not grant a special privilege to this particular lot due to the slope of the lot and the location of the existing single family dwelling. The path to the front door travels into the rear yard setback between the house and a steep slope, requiring a retaining wall that is tall enough to retain the slope. It is not considered a special privilege to have a walkway to the front door of the house, and to have a retaining wall stabilize the dirt adjacent to the walkway. Given the steepness of the lot and the existing conditions of the single family dwelling, granting a Variance is not considered a special privilege, since it will allow the property owners to a build a retaining wall at the entrance to their house; a privilege enjoyed by all homes. in the area. 2. Because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance section would deprive this property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning cla~sification, so that a denial of the application would result in undue property loss; The special circumstances applicable to the property are the topography and the shape. This is a very steeply sloping lot and the entrance to the house is at the top and rear of the property. A retaining wall greater than four feet in height is needed to connect the driveway walkway to the front door of the house. Without the tall retaining wall the path from the driveway to the front entrance would be extremely steep and hazardous. The strict application of the height requirements for retaining walls would deprive the owners of the ability to enjoy an entry way similar to that enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity under identical zoning classifications. ATTACHMENT 3

22 Resolution Belvedere A venue April 19, 2016 Page2 3. The granting of this Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements of owners of other premises, or to the quiet enjoyment of their premises. The granting of the Variance for retaining wall height in the rear yard will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements of owners of other premises, as all construction will be governed by the uniform Building Code requirements as well as regulations restricting the construction impacts. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the requested Variance on April 19, 2016; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission made the following findings of fact: PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Belvedere Planning Commission on April 19, 2016, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: RECUSED: Marsha Lasky, Planning Commission Chair Alison Foulis, City Clerk

23 _....,,RECEIVED Date: Project Address: /~/} e&/vevferr AVR. APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW CITY OF BELVEDERE PLANNING COMMISSION ~ 450 SAN RAFAEL AVE BELVEDERE, CA ,._... DEC '.' Pif FAX I, City of Belvedere l~(1tr,( '... FOR STAFF USE ONLY. ' I Rec'd. by: /l((;v( Planning Comm. Approval )( :. \ Design Review Exception D Amount: $)--z,,)--... Receipt No.: 9'r'fd-7 Staff Approval D Parcel No.: O&o -t ~2-0µ Zone: Jo<L6 ii:'\.'.. SECTION 1 PROJECT SUMMARY Does this project have an active building permit? Does this project have Planning Commission approval? No lit' Yes D Address of Property: t~a /2e/v~dtm Ave No ~ Yes D Permit No.: Record Owner of Property: f2tlfh_. awf (}f/'ver Vefll/t.yYl Mailing /'.?;>{} [2elvedere A-lie. Daytime Phone: f/7.. y3-6441= Address:. t?itvidet~.. oa Fax:-., , 141UJ 1 befhray.jtmt.yn {! ff_!fttdtl U;Jl;f Owner's Representative: ~i~'f= Rff.yt1P, 'f?, hyn'(?; /U-siff's L.11~ Mailing /Ob'Z tvrff2_ $;t Daytime Phone: 5/o.. ft;bf-~11 Address: ~Y' CA Fax: ----= :-r--- 14J_/)ft! thyneder!.i9nr&~mtt1z.tc111 Project Description:,fl&«.e ~ llfl-1</ldl., ' ~ ' ' : I ' : J ' Design Review Application Page 1 c I U:\planningmanager\Planning Forms\PLANNING FORMS- LATEST EDITI()N\APP~IGATION FOR DESIGN REVIEWrevl doc \, ATTACHMENT 4

24 Project Address: /~/) et/fltjje~ tflaz ZONING PARAMETERS: Lot Area.... Lot Coverage.... Total Floor Area.... Front Yard Setback.... Left Sideyard Setback.... Right Sideyard Setback.... Rear Yard Setback... Building Height Maximum... Building Height Average... Parking Spaces.... Required Existing Proposed i ~, 1 &)O"s~'f. N.A. 16 fem: 5f!W 'ifat Date Filed: _ General lnformatioq SECTION 2 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION REQUIRED BY CEQA J I (To Be Completed by~pplicant) ;/c...:;..:2.-1--/...::..7_,_--'-l '5= ' ' I. Name and address of developer or project sponsor: P WH~f$: Befh~ ~~ O/ lvtr \te!akylll 2. Address of project: / 2{) EJ.e/vu/ere Ave Name, ad~:lress, and telephone number of person to be contacted concerning this project: f,ee- 6evffovt.1.. Indicate number omh~ permit application for the project to which_t[lis form pertains: ::_., List and describe any other related permits and other public approvals required for.this. _project, including those required by city, regional, state and federal agencies: ~~m~~~~rtct ~R~-~/~~ ~--~-~-----~~ Proposed use of site (Project for which this f6r m is filed):. ~ind/ e_- fmu, j1 ('&<. If evtft4 / 1'4 vvrrent U$e. 1f.t?lft - vi~ tha:hf= pto(lbfr?d Year built: /\lt{, Original architect:,,ne.ll.a~ Project Description 9. Site size. ----=1''--"-~--il'-'q, '5.;::;;...=.0-""'~-=... f-' Square footage 'UJ!-.!:l...= Number of floors of construction.,_a/""-'-'. A'-"-" Amount of off-street parking provided. 1. 1fAter 1V,.dnVM&( 1 2 4f4!4 in ~"'-oe 13. Plans attached?,y... e..._.s.., Design Review Application Page 2 of 9 City of Belvedere U:\planningmanager\Planning Fonns\PLANNING FORMS- LATEST EDITION\APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEWrevl-l I-I I.doc

25 I ' Project Address: /1'!) 8e/ tied ere Av.G!. 15. Associated projects, such as required grading or staging. rj_ij_~_e 16. Anticipated incremental development....;vj:...:..;;..l)_lf.:...~ If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or rents, and type of household size expected. ex.tf? I ft -Rvt. 18. If commercial, indicate the type, whether neighborhood, city or regional! area, and loading facilities _ 19. If the project involves a variance, conditional use r rezonin fue~~~~oo~req~red ~~~ ~e~~~~~~-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all items checked yes (attach additional sheets as necessary). 20. Change in existing features of any bays, tidelands, beaches, or hills, or substantial alteration of ground contours. 21. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public lands or roads. 22. Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project. 23. Significant amounts of solid waste or litter. 24. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in, vicinity. 25. Change in ocean, bay, lake, stream or ground water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing drainage patterns. v 26. SubstantiaFchange in existing nois~9r.vibration,levelsjn t!ie vicinity. 27. Site on filled land or on slope of 1 o percent or"more.... ' 28. Use of, or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, sucli as toxic substances, flammables or explosives. - " 29. Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.). 30. Substantially increase fossil fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas, etc.). 31. Relationship to a larger project or series of projects. 32. Changes to a,structur.e or landscape with architectural or histoiical value Changes to a site with archeological or cultural value such as midden sail:. r Yes D No UV- D IQ"' D liji' D 1i ' D u;( D ~ D ~ D liy' D u;y' D ~ D ua1 D ~ D lid" o g" Environmental ~etting,. r :..... ',.,. 34. Describe the project site as it exists before the project, 'including information on topography, soil stability, plants and animal$, and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. DescribE? any existing. structures jon the site, and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of the site. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepf;:.;;::z; :}]t_~!:y'*'~'f&!nir- 411 W~tJ;//;lJc;{ /117/st'Ji '. 35. Describe the surrounding properties, including information on plants and animals and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land use (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use {onefamily, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.), and scale of development (height, frontage, setback, rear yard, etc.). Attach photographs of the vicinity. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepted. Design Review Application)' Page 3of9.; City of Belvedere U:\planningmanager\Planning Fonns\PLANNING FORMS -LATEST EDlTION\APPUCATION FOR DESIGN REVIEWrevl doc

26 .:. :-.... Project Address: l?tj 8elvadttie Ave SECTION 3 ~.J~S.1'IMATE OF TI1\1E FOR CONSTRUCTION For Design Review applications not requiring a building permit this. form does not apply. Review approvals expire twelve (12) months from the date of approval. Design This Section advises you of the Time Limit Guidelines that are applied to all Design Review applications that require a building permit as prescribed by Section 20: of the Belvedere Municipal Code. "As part of any application for Design Review, the applicant shall file a reasonable estimate of the cost of the proposed construction, and based thereon, a constructibn time limit shall be established for the project in accordance with Section (b) of the Belvedere Municipal Code. Compliance with such time limit shall become a condition ofdesign review approval." The maximum time for completion of construction shall not exceed six months for additions and remodeling up to $100,000.in value; 12 months for construction up to $500,000 in value; and 18 months for construction valued at more than $500,000. Failure to compl~te.construction in the agreed upon time Wiil resulf iii fines ranging from $400 per day to $800 per day with a $200,000 maximum penalty. Application for an extension of the prescribed time limit can be made providing certain conditions are met. The maximum extension is 6 months. The time for completion of the construction shall also be indicated on the building permit..-. In the space provided below please indicate the estimated project valuation.. Estimated cost of construction: $ 1-i-=fJ_,_..:::c/J.:;()..;;.'O ~. Based on the above estimated project vciluation, check one of the following Time Limit Guidelines that shall apply to your project: O 1. For new construction, the demonstrable value of which is estimated to be less than $500,000. Construction shall be completed twelve (12) months from the commencement of work following the issuance of the building permit. o ~ 3. For new. construction, the demonstrable value of which is estimated to be more than $500,000. Construction shall be completed eighteen (18) months from the commencement of work following the issuance of the building permit. For additions, alterations, modifications and repairs, the demonstrable value of which is estimated at less than $100,000. Construction shall. be completed six (6) months from the commencement of work following the issuance.of the building permit. o 4. For additions, alterations, modifications and repairs, the demonstrable value of which is estimated at less than $ : :. Construction shall be completed twelve (12) months frgm the commencement of. w.ork following the issuance of the building permit. O 5. For additions, alterations, modifications and repairs, the demonstrable value of which is estimated at more than $ Construction shall be completed eighteen (18) months from the commencement of work following the issuance of the building permit. -~ 1...,. :, 1 \. ; '.. : :! 1' i I I! -. : ~ l; ~ '' For those projects that do not fall under any of the above Time Limit Guideli.nE1s.or wisj"\.tq e~ceed the time limit that was approved by the Planning Commission, the following outlines the "Extension of-construction Time Limif' ( ) process: Design Review Application Page 4 of 9 City of Belvedere U:\planningmanager\Planning Forms\PLANNJNG FORMS - LA TEST EDITION\APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEWrevl doc

27 Project Address: I '3() Be/v'P.f.u.e Al/6'. 1. Within twelve months following the original approval of Design.Review for the construction, and provided that no construction activity has yet commenced on the project, the applicant may apply for an extension of the established construction time limit, not to exceed an additional six months. 2. An application for an extension of the constru~tion time limit shall be accompanied by complete working drawings for the construction, a written explanation of the reasons for the requested extension, and a fee, as established by City Council resolution. 3. Within 10 working days of receipt of a complete applicatio"n 1fdr extension,. said application shall be reviewed by a committee consisting of the City's Building Official, the City Planner, and the City Engineer, meeting together with the project contractor, archite;lct,.and, at the applicant's option, the applicant and/or any other representatives of the applicant. At the completion of such review, the committee shall mak~ 1 a recommendation to the Planning Com~i~s.i~~.Y'-'.heth(:}po apprc)ve the r~quested e?<ter1siori:, : 1,. ;,,:.-.~ 4. The committee's re c~mmendation shall be placed on the next ~v~ilable Planning Commission agenda and noticed as at:l amenqment to }b~-: applicant's existing Design Review ap.proval. Any modification by the Planning Commission of the original construction time limit shall not.extend the existing expiration date of the Design Review approval. 5. Administrative extension. Within 10 working days of receipt of a complete application for extension, said application shall be reviewed by a committee consisting of the City's Building Official, the City Planner, and the City Engineer, meeting together with the project contractor, architect, and, at the applicant's option, the applicant and/or any other representatives of the applicant. The committee may recommend to the Planning Commission, and the Planning Commission may approve, an extension if it is determined that any one or more of the following factors presents an unusual obstacle to complying with the standard construction time limit: a. Site topography; b. Site access; c. Geologic issues; d. Neighborhood considerations; e. Other unusual factors. At the completion of such review, the committee shall make a written recommendation to the Planning Commission whether or not to approve the requested extension a0nd setting forth the findings it h9s made justifying its decision. The Committee shall have the authority to administratively appro\fe requests for extension, subject solely to the guidelines of Paragraphs 2 and 3 above, provic:fed however that such extensions do not result in a construction time line exceeding 18 months. SECTION 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF HO~Y.BILLIN.G <;osts.j _: <' l ; l I. This Section advises you of the costs that may b~ involved in processing Planning-related applications and/or appeals.-'. You are' ihereb'y requested' t0 acknowledge this information and agree to be responsible for all expenses incurred in the processing of your application(s)/appeal(s). As the property owner/appellant, you agree to be responsible for the payment of all costs, both direct and indirect, associated with the processing of the applications(s)/appeals(s) referenced below. Such costs may be incurred from the following source: Hourly billing costs as of July 1, 2008, (subject to change without notice): : 0 --Planning Manager. $ Assistant Planner $ City Attorney $ Specialized Planning Consultant Actual costs + 25% overhead Design Review Application Page 5 of 9 City of Belvedere U:\planningmanager\Planning Forms\PLANNING FORMS - LATEST EDITION\APPLICA TION FOR DESIGN REVIEWrevl doc

28 Project Address: l~o 8ttl11~Jere. Ave. For all applications and appeals, an initial deposit is required at the time of submittal, with the amounts determined by City Council resolution. In addition to the initial deposit, the property owner/appellant may be required to make further deposits for anticipated work. Invoices are due and payable within 15 days. Application(s) /or appeal(s) will not be placed on an agenda until these deposits are received. SECTION 5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RESPONSIBILITY This Section applies to all projects that receive design review. It has been found that there are often misunderstandings regarding changes to building plans that receive Design Review. This occurs when construction plans are submitted to the Building Department for permit issuance after planning approval has been achieved. Another common occurrence is a change to the project while it is underway without first obtaining an approval from the City for the deviation from the original plan. To help your project proceed in an expeditious and harmonious manner, the City of Belvedere wishes to inform you of several basic understandings regarding your project and its approval. By you and your representative signing this document, you are acknowledging that you have read, understand, and will comply with each of the points listed. 1. Once Design Review approval has been granted, construction plans may be submitted to the City. The construction plans shall be identical to the plans approved for design review. (Authority: Belvedere Municipal Code Section ). Deviations from the plans approved for Design Review cannot be approved except by an amendment to the Design Review approval. It is the applicants' responsibility to assure conformance, and the failure of staff to bring nonconformities to the applicants' attention shall not excuse the applicant from such compliance. 2. Comments from City staff regarding the project shall neither be deemed official nor relied upon unless they are in writing and signed by the City Manager or his designee. 3. Without the prior written approval of the City, construction on the project shall not deviate in any manner, including but not limited to form, size or color, from approved construction plans. If at any time during construction, and without such written approval, construction on the project is found by a member of City staff to deviate from the approved construction plans in any manner, an official STOP WORK ORDER will be issued by the City, and there shall be a total cessation of all work on the project. 4. If such a STOP WORK ORDER is issued, the City may initiate proceedings to impose administrative penalties or nuisance abatement proceedings and issue an order to show cause, which will compel the undersigned property owner to appear before the City Council and show cause why the work performed does not deviate from the approved plans and why such work should not be condemned as a public nuisance and abated. (Authority: Belvedere Municipal Code Chapters 1.14 and 8.12) Design Review Application Page 6 of 9 City of Belvedere U:\planningmanager\Planning Fonns\PLANNING FORMS - LATEST EDITION\APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEWrevl doc

29 ~. Project Address: /?tj eel vede~ Ave. S]!!cr10N 6 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR APPLICANTS Story Pole Requirement Preliminary Story Poles sufficient to indicate the height and shape of the proposed structure or additions shall be placed on the site at least twenty (20) days prior to the first meeting date at which this application will be heard. Final Story Poles must be placed at the site at least ten (10) days prior to the first meeting date and removed no later than ten (10) days following the final city action on the project application. Story poles shall be connected at their tops with colored tape or ribbon to clearl{ indicate ridges, eaves, and other major elements of the structure. Limit on the Number of Administrative and Planning Com.mission.Design Review Approvals Pursuant to Belvedere Municipal Code Section (8)(1)(a), for a site or structure with no existing active Design Review approval, during any twelve-month period, an applicant may obtain up to four administrative approvals, which may be in the form of either Staff Approval, Design Review Exception, or a combination of the two. However, there is no limit to the number of times an applicant may apply for Planning Commission Design Review. Any such administrative or Planning Commission Design Review approval(s) shall be valid for a period of twelve (12) months from the date of approval, unless a building permit has been issued for the project within said twelve (12) month period, in which case the Design Review approval shall be valid as long as there is an active building permit for the project.. Once a project has been approved by Planning Staff or the Planning Commission, administrative approvals to amend the existing active Design Review approval for that proj~ct shall be limited to three such approvals at any time during the lifetime of the underlying Design Review approval, plus one such approval during the process of obtaining final inspection approval of the project. Any such administrative approval(s) granted shall NOT extend the twelve (12) month ~erm, of the underlying Design Review approval, or the building permit construction time limit if a building permit has been issued for the project. STATEMENT OF PROPERTY OWNERSHIP, CERT,IF~~ATION OF APPLICATION, & DESIGNATION OF REPRESENT~TIVE All property owners must complete and sign the section below which i~ applicable to youipropeitjt. Street address of subject property':. I?tJ E?t lv~d~r~ Av~. Assessor's Parcel No(s). of subject property: O_{p_IJ_... / 8.._Z_-_()-"Z"--"-C? );> Properties Owned by a Trust, LLC, Corporation, Partnership, or Other Entity Please provide proof of ownership and of the signer's authority to enter into contracts regarding this property. One of (or a combination of) the following documents may contain the necessary information. For trusts: the trust document or a certificate of trust, including any attachments thereto; property deed; certificate of title insurance. For other entities: articles of incorporation; partnership agreement; property deed; certificate of title insurance; written certification of facts by an attorney. Photocopies are acceptable. To ensure privacy, documentation will be shredded in a timely manner, or, upon request, returned to the applicant. Design Review Application Page 7 of 9 City of Belvedere U:\planningmanager\Planning Forms\PLANNING FORMS- LATEST EDITION\APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEWrevl doc

CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD IBOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Coast Highway APN

CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD IBOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Coast Highway APN CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT HEARING DATE: October 13,2011 TO: DESIGN REVIEW BOARD IBOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CASE: Variance 7717 Design Review 11-163 Coastal Development

More information

RESOLUTION NO

RESOLUTION NO RESOLUTION NO. 2018- RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BELMONT APPROVING A SINGLE-FAMILY DESIGN REVIEW AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT FOR A VACANT LOT ON LOWER LOCK AVENUE (APN: 043-042-750,

More information

CITY OF BELVEDERE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT. AGENDA ITEM: 3 MEETING DATE: March 20, 2018 TO: City of Belvedere Planning Commission

CITY OF BELVEDERE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT. AGENDA ITEM: 3 MEETING DATE: March 20, 2018 TO: City of Belvedere Planning Commission CITY OF BELVEDERE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT REPORT DATE: March 13, 2018 AGENDA ITEM: 3 MEETING DATE: March 20, 2018 TO: FROM: REVIEWED BY: SUBJECT: City of Belvedere Planning Commission Rebecca

More information

CITY OF BELVEDERE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT

CITY OF BELVEDERE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CITY OF BELVEDERE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT REPORT DATE: January 10, 2018 MEETING DATE: January 16, 2018 TO: City of Belvedere Planning Commission AGENDA ITEM: 2 FROM: REVIEWED BY: SUBJECT: Rebecca

More information

14825 Fruitvale Ave.

14825 Fruitvale Ave. REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Date: August 26, 2015 Application: PDR14-0017 Location/APN: 14825 Fruitvale Ave. / 397-18-028 Applicant/Owner: Staff Planner: Sin Yong Michael Fossati 14825 Fruitvale

More information

Design Review Commission Report

Design Review Commission Report City of Beverly Hills Planning Division 455 N. Rexford Drive Beverly Hills, CA 90210 TEL. (310) 285-1141 FAX. (310) 858-5966 Design Review Commission Report Meeting Date: Thursday, March 2, 2017 Subject:

More information

P.C. RESOLUTION NO

P.C. RESOLUTION NO P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 08-423 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CALABASAS TO ADOPT A SIGN PROGRAM (PL0800543) AND APPROVE A VARIANCE (PL0800544) FOR INTERNAL ILLUMINATION OF THE MERCEDES-BENZ

More information

PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT APRIL 7, 2016

PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT APRIL 7, 2016 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT APRIL 7, 2016 TO: FROM: Members of the Planning Commission Talyn Mirzakhanian, Senior Planner FILE NO.: 160001710 PROPOSAL: APPLICANT: RECOMMENDATION: A request for a

More information

PC RESOLUTION NO

PC RESOLUTION NO PC RESOLUTION NO. 14-01-14-02 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP fttm) 17441. REZONE {RZ) 13-003, ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL (AC) 13-003, TREE REMOVAL PERMIT (TRP) 13-052. GRADING PLAN MODIFICATION (GPM) 13-002. CONDITIONAL

More information

CITY OF VACAVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda Item No. G. 1 STAFF REPORT August 4, Staff Contact: Tricia Shortridge (707)

CITY OF VACAVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda Item No. G. 1 STAFF REPORT August 4, Staff Contact: Tricia Shortridge (707) CITY OF VACAVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda Item No. G. 1 STAFF REPORT August 4, 2009 Staff Contact: Tricia Shortridge (707) 449-5140 TITLE: REQUEST: LONGS / CVS DRIVE-THRU PHARMACY & REMODEL TIME EXTENSION

More information

City of Lafayette Study Session Staff Report Design Review Commission

City of Lafayette Study Session Staff Report Design Review Commission ++ City of Lafayette Study Session Staff Report Design Review Commission Meeting Date: January 08, 2018 Staff: Subject: Chris Juram, Planning Technician SS12-17 Miramar Homebuilders, R-20 Zoning: Request

More information

DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM

DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM AGENDA DATE: OCTOBER 17, 2012 TO: Chair Woollett and Members of the Design Review Committee THRU: FROM: SUBJECT: Leslie Aranda Roseberry, Planning Manager Daniel Ryan,

More information

CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT. Design Review Coastal Development Permit 10-63

CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT. Design Review Coastal Development Permit 10-63 CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT HEARING DATE: TO: CASE: APPLICANT: LOCATION: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: PREPARED BY: December 2, 2010 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Design Review 10-198

More information

DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM

DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM AGENDA DATE: OCTOBER 3, 2012 TO: Chair Woollett and Members of the Design Review Committee THRU: FROM: SUBJECT: Leslie Aranda Roseberry, Planning Manager Daniel Ryan,

More information

CITY OF ZEELAND PLANNING COMMISSION

CITY OF ZEELAND PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW AND SPECIAL LAND USE Date City Official App. Filing Fee Rec'd ($350) NOTE TO APPLICANT: Please submit this application for Site Plan Review along with twenty (20) copies

More information

City of Lafayette Study Session Staff Report Design Review Commission

City of Lafayette Study Session Staff Report Design Review Commission City of Lafayette Study Session Staff Report Design Review Commission Meeting Date: April 24, 2017 Staff: Payal Bhagat, Senior Planner Subject: HDP18-15 & HDP31-15 Ramesh Patel & Melcor Development (Owners),

More information

Site Design (Table 2) Fact Sheet & Focus Questions:

Site Design (Table 2) Fact Sheet & Focus Questions: Site Design (Table 2) Fact Sheet & Focus Questions: BACKGROUND WHAT IS SITE DESIGN? Site design refers to the arrangement of buildings and open spaces on adjacent sites to maximize the shared benefits

More information

COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST HILLSIDE RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES MANUAL

COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST HILLSIDE RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES MANUAL COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST HILLSIDE RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES MANUAL The following checklist summarizes development guidelines and standards. See the appropriate section for a complete explanation of the

More information

Architectural Review Board Report

Architectural Review Board Report Architectural Review Board Report Architectural Review Board Meeting: February 3, 2014 Agenda Item: 7.9 To: From: Subject: Architectural Review Board Steve Traeger, Principal Urban Designer Scott Albright,

More information

ARTICLE V PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

ARTICLE V PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT ARTICLE V PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT A. Purpose and Objective The Planned Unit Development (PUD) procedure provides a flexible land use and design regulation through the use of performance criteria

More information

CITY OF VACAVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda Item No. G.3 STAFF REPORT August 18, 2015 Staff Contact: Peyman Behvand (707)

CITY OF VACAVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda Item No. G.3 STAFF REPORT August 18, 2015 Staff Contact: Peyman Behvand (707) CITY OF VACAVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda Item No. G.3 STAFF REPORT August 18, 2015 Staff Contact: Peyman Behvand (707) 449-5140 TITLE: REQUEST: VISTA CROSSINGS PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM AMENDMENT PLANNED

More information

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SIGNAL HILL, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 16-03, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE OFFICIAL ZONING

More information

ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE ZONED UNINCORPORATED AREAS ARTICLE 1300 OF PUTNAM COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA Page 119 ARTICLE 1300 LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING

ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE ZONED UNINCORPORATED AREAS ARTICLE 1300 OF PUTNAM COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA Page 119 ARTICLE 1300 LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING OF PUTNAM COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA Page 119 ARTICLE 1300 LSCAPING SCREENING 1300.01 STATEMENT OF LEGISLATIVE INTENT 1300.02 GENERAL PROVISIONS 1300.03 REQUIREMENTS 1300.04 SUBMISSION APPROVAL 1300.05 SCREENING

More information

DATE: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF FEBRUARY 24, 2016

DATE: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF FEBRUARY 24, 2016 DATE: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF FEBRUARY 24, 2016 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: THE PLANNING COMMISSION LISA COSTA SANDERS, TOWN PLANNER REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL STRUCTURES PERMIT FOR A POOL IN THE SIDE YARD AND

More information

B L A C K D I A M O N D D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S for Multi-family Development

B L A C K D I A M O N D D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S for Multi-family Development B L A C K D I A M O N D D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S for Multi-family Development Adopted June 18, 2009 This section of the Design and focuses on site planning and design guidance for new multi-family

More information

RESOLUTION NO. WHEREAS, the proposed Master Plan for Villa Esperanza (VE), located at 2116

RESOLUTION NO. WHEREAS, the proposed Master Plan for Villa Esperanza (VE), located at 2116 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASADENA APPROVING A MASTER PLAN FOR VILLA ESPERANZA WHEREAS, the proposed Master Plan for Villa Esperanza (VE), located at 2116 Villa Street

More information

ORDINANCE NO. 430 REGARDING WATER CONSERVATION

ORDINANCE NO. 430 REGARDING WATER CONSERVATION ORDINANCE NO. XXXX AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON AMENDING TITLE IV, CHAPTER 13E (WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE MARIN MUNICIPAL WATER

More information

ARTICLE 17 SITE PLAN REVIEW

ARTICLE 17 SITE PLAN REVIEW ARTICLE 17 SITE PLAN REVIEW 17.01 INTENT AND PURPOSE The intent of this section is to provide for consultation and cooperation between the applicant and the township planning commission so that the applicant

More information

5.1.1 The streetscape along US Highway 64 (Brevard Road); and, The built environment within new residential developments; and,

5.1.1 The streetscape along US Highway 64 (Brevard Road); and, The built environment within new residential developments; and, Article 5. Landscaping 5.1 Purpose The Town of Laurel Park s landscape standards are designed to create a beautiful, aesthetically pleasing built environment that will complement and enhance community

More information

Planning Commission Staff Report February 19, 2009

Planning Commission Staff Report February 19, 2009 Planning Commission Staff Report February 19, 2009 Project: Warda Warehouse File: EG-08-051 Request: Design Review Location: 9260 Bendel Place APNs: 134-0660-004 Planner: Gerald Park Property Owner/Applicant

More information

City of Lafayette Staff Report

City of Lafayette Staff Report City of Lafayette Staff Report For: By: Design Review Commission Greg Wolff, Senior Planner Meeting Date: April 27, 2015 Subject: SS03-15 Gundi & Peter Younger (Owners), R-40 Zoning: Request for a Study

More information

ORDINANCE NO. City of Bellingham City Attorney 210 Lottie Street Bellingham, Washington INFILL HOUSING ORDINANCE Page 1

ORDINANCE NO. City of Bellingham City Attorney 210 Lottie Street Bellingham, Washington INFILL HOUSING ORDINANCE Page 1 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO LAND USE PLANNING AND ZONING, CREATING A NEW BMC CHAPTER 20.28 INFILL HOUSING, AND NEW SUBSECTION BMC 20.12.030.E, GREEN FACTOR LANDSCAPING STANDARDS, AND AMENDING

More information

ARTICLE 9: LANDSCAPING AND FENCING REQUIREMENTS

ARTICLE 9: LANDSCAPING AND FENCING REQUIREMENTS ARTICLE 9: LANDSCAPING AND FENCING REQUIREMENTS Section 9.01 Intent The intent of the landscaping requirements are to improve the appearance of lot areas and soften paved areas and buildings; to provide

More information

Landscape and fencing requirements of this Chapter shall apply to all new landscaped areas.

Landscape and fencing requirements of this Chapter shall apply to all new landscaped areas. Chapter 19.06. Landscaping and Fencing. Sections: 19.06.01. Purpose. 19.06.02. Required Landscaping Improvements. 19.06.03. General Provisions. 19.06.04. Landscaping Plan. 19.06.05. Completion of Landscape

More information

Staff Report. Conditional Use PLANNING DIVISION COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. Salt Lake City Planning Commission

Staff Report. Conditional Use PLANNING DIVISION COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. Salt Lake City Planning Commission Staff Report PLANNING DIVISION COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT To: From: Salt Lake City Planning Commission Maryann Pickering, Principal Planner (801) 535-7660 Date: December 10, 2014 Re: Church of Scientology

More information

CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. TO: Parking and Public Improvements Commission

CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. TO: Parking and Public Improvements Commission Clay Curtin, Management Analyst (I the same walls at a maximum of 1 foot tall. Section 7.36.150 of the Municipal Code permits BY: Eric Haaland, Associate Planner right-of-way) between walkways leading

More information

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SIMI VALLEY DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SIMI VALLEY DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: ORDINANCE NO. 1241 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SIMI VALLEY APPROVING A SIMI VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE TEXT AMENDMENT (Z-S-721) TO ALLOW THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL TURF IN MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL

More information

Planned Development Review Revisions (Project No. PLNPCM )

Planned Development Review Revisions (Project No. PLNPCM ) Planned Development Review Revisions (Project No. PLNPCM2014-00139) Standard residential development Planned Development Example: Smaller lot sizes than what is allowed to create open space amenity. What

More information

Approved: CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 5, :30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL

Approved: CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 5, :30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL Approved: CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 5, 2015 6:30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL PLANNING CASES A. Planning Case 15-016; Final Planned Unit Development Arden Plaza;

More information

Location and Field Inspection: History: Master Plan Recommendation:

Location and Field Inspection: History: Master Plan Recommendation: R E S O L U T I O N WHEREAS, the Prince George s County Planning Board has reviewed Special Permit Application No. SP-130008, Sudsville Laundry, requesting a special permit to construct an addition and

More information

TOWN OF APPLE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION. CASE NUMBER: Development Permit No and Variance No

TOWN OF APPLE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION. CASE NUMBER: Development Permit No and Variance No TOWN OF APPLE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda Item No. 2 Staff Report AGENDA DATE: October 2, 2013 CASE NUMBER: Development Permit No. 2013-004 and Variance No. 2013-001 APPLICANT: PROPOSAL: R.A.M. Architecture,

More information

PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (MASTER PLAN & UNIT PLAN)

PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (MASTER PLAN & UNIT PLAN) Central Permit Center 555 Santa Clara Street Vallejo CA 94590 Business License Building Fire Prevention Planning Public Works 707.648.4310 707.648.4374 707.648.4565 707.648.4326 707.651.7151 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT

More information

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT COUNTY OF SAN MATEO PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT DATE: May 23, 2018 TO: FROM: Planning Commission Planning Staff SUBJECT: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Consideration of an appeal of the Community Development

More information

Urban Planning and Land Use

Urban Planning and Land Use Urban Planning and Land Use 701 North 7 th Street, Room 423 Phone: (913) 573-5750 Kansas City, Kansas 66101 Fax: (913) 573-5796 Email: planninginfo@wycokck.org www.wycokck.org/planning To: From: Board

More information

PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT NOVEMBER 15, 2012

PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT NOVEMBER 15, 2012 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT NOVEMBER 15, 2012 TO: FROM: Members of the Planning Commission Michael Klein, Associate Planner FILE NO.: 120000890 PROPOSAL: APPLICANT: Request for an Administrative

More information

Chapter LANDSCAPE FOR PLANNING APPLICATIONS

Chapter LANDSCAPE FOR PLANNING APPLICATIONS Chapter 27.71 LANDSCAPE FOR PLANNING APPLICATIONS 27.71.010 PURPOSE. The purpose of this chapter is to enhance the quality of life in San Mateo by the provision for appropriate design of landscaping and

More information

CHESAPEAKE LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE

CHESAPEAKE LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE CHESAPEAKE LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE CONSERVATION PRESERVATION CZO 19-600 Effective October 16, 2008 BUFFER YARD C PARKING LOT REFORESTATION YEAR 1 REFORESTATION YEAR 4 BUFFER YARD F CBPA REFORESTATION Page

More information

Request Change in Nonconformity. Staff Recommendation Approval. Staff Planner Jonathan Sanders

Request Change in Nonconformity. Staff Recommendation Approval. Staff Planner Jonathan Sanders Applicant & Owner Public Hearing April 11, 2018 City Council Election District Beach Agenda Item 5 Request Change in Nonconformity Staff Recommendation Approval Staff Planner Jonathan Sanders Location

More information

SITE PLAN REVIEW PROCESS

SITE PLAN REVIEW PROCESS BOWNE TOWNSHIP PO Box 35, 8240 Alden Nash Road, Alto, Michigan 49302 Ph. 616-868-6846 Fax 616-868-0110 http://www.bownetwp.org SITE PLAN REVIEW PROCESS 1. Application Form and Fee Schedule Site Plan Review

More information

RESOLUTION NO: WHEREAS, the subject property has a Public, Semi-Public (PS) zoning designation and a General Plan designation of Institutional; and

RESOLUTION NO: WHEREAS, the subject property has a Public, Semi-Public (PS) zoning designation and a General Plan designation of Institutional; and RESOLUTION NO: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASADENA APPROVING A 14-YEAR, EIGHT-PHASE MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT FOR HUNTINGTON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL LOCATED AT 100 WEST CALIFORNIA BOULEVARD

More information

Infill Residential Design Guidelines

Infill Residential Design Guidelines Infill Residential Design Guidelines Adopted March 23, 2004 Amended September 10, 2013 City of Orange Community Development Department Planning Division Phone: (714) 744-7220 Fax: (714) 744-7222 www.cityoforange.org

More information

Chair Leskinen and Planning Commission Members Jessica Loftus, City Administrator

Chair Leskinen and Planning Commission Members Jessica Loftus, City Administrator Agenda Item 3 Date Application Received: 10/21/15 Date Application Considered as Complete: 10/30/15 120-Day Review Period Expires: 02/27/16 To: From: Chair Leskinen and Planning Commission Members Jessica

More information

CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD

CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT HEARING DATE: April 5,2012 TO: DESIGN REVIEW BOARD CASE: Design Review 12-347 APPLICANT: LOCATION: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: PREPARED BY:

More information

SPECIFIC PLAN Requirements

SPECIFIC PLAN Requirements CITY OF LANCASTER PLANNING DEPARTMENT 44933 Fern Avenue, Lancaster, California 93534 (661) 723-6100 SPECIFIC PLAN Requirements Purpose The purpose of a specific plan is to provide for the logical development

More information

BUFFERS, TREE PROTECTION AND LANDSCAPING. Sec Purpose and Intent.

BUFFERS, TREE PROTECTION AND LANDSCAPING. Sec Purpose and Intent. ARTICLE 20 BUFFERS, TREE PROTECTION AND LANDSCAPING Sec. 20.1. Purpose and Intent. Trees improve air and water quality, reduce soil erosion, reduce noise and glare, provide habitat for desirable wildlife,

More information

Bylaw A Bylaw to amend Bylaw 12800, as amended, The Edmonton Zoning Bylaw Amendment No. 2239

Bylaw A Bylaw to amend Bylaw 12800, as amended, The Edmonton Zoning Bylaw Amendment No. 2239 Bylaw 17672 A Bylaw to amend Bylaw 12800, as amended, The Edmonton Zoning Bylaw Amendment No. 2239 WHEREAS City Council at its meeting of February 22, 2001, gave third reading to Bylaw 12800, as amended;

More information

Design Review Application *Please call prior to submittal meeting to determine applicable fees*

Design Review Application *Please call prior to submittal meeting to determine applicable fees* CITY OF EAGLE 660 E. Civic Lane, Eagle, ID 83616 Phone#: (208) 939-0227 Fax: (208) 938-3854 Design Review Application *Please call prior to submittal meeting to determine applicable fees* FILE NO.: CROSS

More information

Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 4360, 2004, Amendment Bylaw No. 4897, 2016 (Sewell s Landing)

Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 4360, 2004, Amendment Bylaw No. 4897, 2016 (Sewell s Landing) District of West Vancouver Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 4360, 2004, Amendment Bylaw No. 4897, 2016 (Sewell s Landing) Effective Date: 1089612v1 District of West Vancouver Official Community Plan Bylaw

More information

I Street, Sacramento, CA

I Street, Sacramento, CA REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION City of Sacramento 12 915 I Street, Sacramento, CA 95814-2671 To: Members of the Planning Commission PUBLIC HEARING March 10, 2011 Subject: El Dorado Savings Sign Variance

More information

MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN PRINCIPLES Site Plan and Design Review Principles Checklist

MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN PRINCIPLES Site Plan and Design Review Principles Checklist MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN PRINCIPLES Site Plan and Design Review Principles Checklist Applicant s Name: Project Address: Phone: Email: Applicant shall fill out the design guidelines checklist for

More information

DESIGN REVIEW STANDARDS CITY OF LANGLEY

DESIGN REVIEW STANDARDS CITY OF LANGLEY DESIGN REVIEW STANDARDS CITY OF LANGLEY I. INTRODUCTION The City of Langley is fortunate to have a strong sense of place and unique quality. This comes in part from its special setting along Saratoga Passage,

More information

M E M O R A N D U M CITY PLANNING DIVISION PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF SANTA MONICA

M E M O R A N D U M CITY PLANNING DIVISION PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF SANTA MONICA M E M O R A N D U M CITY PLANNING DIVISION PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF SANTA MONICA DATE: March 13, 2017 TO: FROM: The Honorable Landmarks Commission Planning Staff SUBJECT: Certificate

More information

The Town Board of the Town of Vienna, County of Dane, State of Wisconsin, does ordain and adopt as follows.

The Town Board of the Town of Vienna, County of Dane, State of Wisconsin, does ordain and adopt as follows. ORDINANCE DRIVEWAYS AND CULVERTS NO. 6-5-06 ORDINANCE CONCERNING DRIVEWAY AND CULVERT REQUIREMENTS 1-1-1 Driveway Permits; Culvert Requirements 1-1-2 Driveway and Culvert Location, Design and Construction

More information

Landscaping Standards

Landscaping Standards CHAPTER 29 ARTICLE 403 29.403 Landscaping Standards Purpose: The purpose of this section is to protect and promote the public health, safety and general welfare by requiring landscaping in relation to

More information

CHAPTER ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS IN THE NC, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ZONE

CHAPTER ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS IN THE NC, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ZONE CITY OF MOSES LAKE MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 18.31 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS IN THE NC, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ZONE Sections: 18.31.010 Purpose 18.31.020 Minimum Lot Area 18.31.030 Setbacks 18.31.040 Maximum

More information

C-I-10. The effect of establishing a comprehensive site review as follows will: B. Reduce the cluttered aspects of current development by:

C-I-10. The effect of establishing a comprehensive site review as follows will: B. Reduce the cluttered aspects of current development by: C-I-10 PART C SECTION I ARTICLE 10 GENERAL REGULATIONS PROJECT SITE REVIEW I. Purpose The effect of establishing a comprehensive site review as follows will: A. Protect streetscapes from projects that

More information

Chapter 19.5 LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS

Chapter 19.5 LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS Chapter 19.5 LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS Sec. 19.5-1. Intent The intent of the landscaping requirements stated herein are as follows: To aid in stabilizing the environment's ecological balance by contribution

More information

CITY OF SAN MATEO ORDINANCE NO

CITY OF SAN MATEO ORDINANCE NO CITY OF SAN MATEO ORDINANCE NO. 2012-4 AMENDING SECTION 27.38.090, OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS, OF CHAPTER 27.38, CBD DISTRICTS-CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT, SECTION 27.64.023, PARKING PROHIBITED ON LAWNS, FLOWERS,

More information

ARTICLE IX SPECIAL PERMIT USES

ARTICLE IX SPECIAL PERMIT USES ARTICLE IX SPECIAL PERMIT USES All special permit uses cited in Article IX and Attachment A of this Ordinance or any other Section of this Ordinance shall be subject to Site Plan Review. The procedures

More information

Landscape Design Requirements and Guidelines for Private Lots in the Old Town North Neighborhood

Landscape Design Requirements and Guidelines for Private Lots in the Old Town North Neighborhood Landscape Design Requirements and Guidelines for Private Lots in the Old Town North Neighborhood July 2009 Prepared for High Country Management on behalf of the OTN Homeowners Association, by Christine

More information

BECONTINUEDATREQUESTOFAPPLICANn

BECONTINUEDATREQUESTOFAPPLICANn BELVEDERE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES REGULAR MEETING 6:30 P.M. A. CALL TO ORDER OF THE REGULAR MEETING CONSENT 1 Chair Marsha Lasky called the regular meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers.

More information

ORDINANCE NO. 14,767

ORDINANCE NO. 14,767 ORDINANCE NO. 14,767 AN ORDINANCE to amend the Municipal Code of the City of Des Moines, Iowa, 2000, adopted by Ordinance No. 13,827, passed June 5, 2000, amended by Ordinance No. 13,878 passed November

More information

CITY OF MERCER ISLAND DESIGN COMMISSION STAFF REPORT

CITY OF MERCER ISLAND DESIGN COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CITY OF MERCER ISLAND DESIGN COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 2 March 9, 2011 Project: Description: Applicant: DSR11-004 The applicant is requesting approval to replace the existing exterior wood framed

More information

PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT SEPTEMBER 1, 2016

PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT SEPTEMBER 1, 2016 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT SEPTEMBER 1, 2016 TO: Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Michael Klein, Planner FILE NO.: 150000780 PROPOSAL: APPLICANT: RECOMMENDATION: A request for a Site Plan

More information

City of Lafayette Study Session Project Data

City of Lafayette Study Session Project Data City of Lafayette Study Session Project Data For: Design Review Commission By: Michael P. Cass, Senior Planner Date: August 24, 2015 Property Address: 954 Mountain View Drive APN: 243-070-011 Zoning District:

More information

BOARD~ ADJUSTMENTIDESIGN RE ~WBOARD PROJECT OVERVIEW

BOARD~ ADJUSTMENTIDESIGN RE ~WBOARD PROJECT OVERVIEW BOARD~ ADJUSTMENTIDESIGN RE ~WBOARD PROJECT OVERVIEW LOCATION: REQUESTED ACTION: EXISTING APPROVALS: ZONING: ADDITIONAL REFERENCES: REQUIRED FINDINGS: STAFF COMMENTS: Site Address: 2165 Temple Hills Drive

More information

CITY OF ALAMEDA PLANNING BOARD Draft RESOLUTION

CITY OF ALAMEDA PLANNING BOARD Draft RESOLUTION CITY OF ALAMEDA PLANNING BOARD Draft RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING BOARD OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION PLN13-0157 TO CONSTRUCT ELEVEN

More information

Chapter RM MULTI FAMILY BUILDING ZONES

Chapter RM MULTI FAMILY BUILDING ZONES Chapter 19.17 RM MULTI FAMILY BUILDING ZONES 19.17.010 Established 19.17.020 Primary Permitted Uses 19.17.030 Accessory Permitted Uses 19.17.040 Secondary Permitted Uses 19.17.050 Conditional Property

More information

E. Natural areas include habitats such as wetlands, tidal marshes, waterways, natural drainage-ways, woodlands and grassland meadows.

E. Natural areas include habitats such as wetlands, tidal marshes, waterways, natural drainage-ways, woodlands and grassland meadows. Adopted November 1999 I. Purpose A. The purpose of these guidelines is to assist in the design and layout of open space, as provided on developed lots within the District. The intent of these guidelines

More information

City of Placerville Planning Commission AGENDA REPORT ITEM 7

City of Placerville Planning Commission AGENDA REPORT ITEM 7 Placerville, a Unique Historical Past Forging into a Golden Future City of Placerville Planning Commission REPORT ITEM 7 MEETING DATE: September 1, 2015 APPLICATION NO: 225 Placerville Drive Site Plan

More information

Construction and Landscaping on Public Property

Construction and Landscaping on Public Property Construction and Landscaping on Public Property City of Manhattan Beach Community Development Department 1400 Highland Avenue 310-802-5504 www.citymb.info January, 2004 Construction and Landscaping on

More information

Residential Design Guidelines

Residential Design Guidelines Residential Design Guidelines Single-Family Residential Design Guidelines Introduction These guidelines seek to provide property owners, designers and developers with a clear understanding of the City

More information

GENERAL INFORMATIONaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

GENERAL INFORMATIONaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: City Staff Date: November 15, 2016 Re: Case #16026 Raymore Activity Center Site Plan GENERAL INFORMATIONaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa Applicant/ Property Owner:

More information

Sec Intent and purpose.

Sec Intent and purpose. 1 of 5 10/12/2012 10:33 AM Hastings, Michigan, Code of Ordinances >> PART II - CODE OF ORDINANCES >> Chapter 90 - ZONING >> ARTICLE XII. - LANDSCAPING >> ARTICLE XII. - LANDSCAPING Sec. 90-1006. - Intent

More information

ORDINANCE WHEREAS, this Ordinance is consistent with the City of Winter Garden Comprehensive Plan; and

ORDINANCE WHEREAS, this Ordinance is consistent with the City of Winter Garden Comprehensive Plan; and ORDINANCE 17-06 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF WINTER GARDEN, FLORIDA, CREATING ARTICLE XIV OF CHAPTER 118 OF THE CITY OF WINTER GARDEN CODE OF ORDINANCES PROVIDING FOR THE EAST PLANT

More information

TO: CITY COUNCIL DATE: MARCH 23,2009

TO: CITY COUNCIL DATE: MARCH 23,2009 Report TO: CITY COUNCIL DATE: MARCH 23,2009 FROM: CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT FOR PASADENA CHRISTIAN SCHOOL AT 1515 NORTH LOS ROBLES AVENUE AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE

More information

II. SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL

II. SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL II. SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL Castle Rock is made up of numerous individually built houses and subdivision tracts that have been developed during the past century. Some of the tracts are diverse in architectural

More information

D. Landscape Design. 1. Coverage Intent: To provide adequate landscaping materials that enhance the appearance of development projects.

D. Landscape Design. 1. Coverage Intent: To provide adequate landscaping materials that enhance the appearance of development projects. D. Landscape Design The standards and guidelines in this section give design guidance for the landscaping components of industrial and office projects. City regulations require that all landscaping be

More information

PRESENTED: April 15, 2008 FILE: DP No. 273/ Development Permit No Government Road Townhomes

PRESENTED: April 15, 2008 FILE: DP No. 273/ Development Permit No Government Road Townhomes DISTRICT OF SQUAMISH REPORT TO: Council FOR: Regular PRESENTED: April 15, 2008 FILE: DP No. 273/2007-26 FROM: SUBJECT: Planning Department Development Permit No. 273 40126 Government Road Townhomes Recommendation

More information

Duplex Design Guidelines

Duplex Design Guidelines Duplex Design Guidelines Adopted by Council May 29, 2006 Prepared By: Table of Contents 1.0 Application and Intent 1 2.0 Areas of Application 2 3.0 Design Principles 3 4.0 Design Guidelines 4 4.1 Site

More information

PART I-D BUFFERS AND LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS

PART I-D BUFFERS AND LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS District Regulations Of General Applicability ARTICLE IX PART I-D BUFFERS AND LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS 9-107 BUFFERS AND LANDSCAPING 9-107 A. General Landscaping and Maintenance Requirements. Except for

More information

ATTACHMENT 2. Planning Commission Resolution with Clean Copy of Ordinance

ATTACHMENT 2. Planning Commission Resolution with Clean Copy of Ordinance ATTACHMENT 2 Planning Commission Resolution with Clean Copy of Ordinance RESOLUTION NO. 1728 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BEVERLY HILLS RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT

More information

5.1 Commercial and Industrial Development. (Effective April 1, 2006)

5.1 Commercial and Industrial Development. (Effective April 1, 2006) 5.1 Commercial and Industrial Development. (Effective April 1, 2006) A. Applicability: The requirements of this section (5.10) shall apply to all uses within the LB Local Business; HB Highway Business;

More information

CITY OF VACAVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda Item No. G.1 STAFF REPORT November 15, Staff Contact: Christina Corsello (707)

CITY OF VACAVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda Item No. G.1 STAFF REPORT November 15, Staff Contact: Christina Corsello (707) CITY OF VACAVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda Item No. G.1 STAFF REPORT November 15, 2011 Staff Contact: Christina Corsello (707) 449-5140 TITLE: VERIZON WIRELESS AT PEABODY ROAD REQUEST: CONDITIONAL USE

More information

FREEWAY/TOURIST DISTRICT

FREEWAY/TOURIST DISTRICT FREEWAY/TOURIST DISTRICT DESIGN STANDARDS FOR THE CITY OF MOUNTLAKE TERRACE March, 2014 MOUNTLAKE TERRACE FREEWAY/TOURIST DESIGN STANDARDS March, 2014 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction...1 Design Site Design

More information

ROLL CALL Member Anthony, Member Avdoulos, Member Greco, Member Lynch, Member Maday, Chair Pehrson

ROLL CALL Member Anthony, Member Avdoulos, Member Greco, Member Lynch, Member Maday, Chair Pehrson CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION SUMMARY CITY OF NOVI Regular Meeting July 11, 2018 7:00 PM Council Chambers Novi Civic Center 45175 W. Ten Mile (248)

More information

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH SAN MATEO COUNTY

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH SAN MATEO COUNTY TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH SAN MATEO COUNTY Planning Office 650/375-7422 Fax 650/375-7415 1600 Floribunda Avenue Hillsborough California 94010 Architecture and Design Review Board LANDSCAPING APPLICATION PACKET

More information

Planning Commission Staff Report February 5, 2015

Planning Commission Staff Report February 5, 2015 Planning Commission Staff Report Project: 99 Cents Only Store File: EG-14-018 Request: General Plan Amendment, Rezone, and Design Review Location: 8945 Brown Road; northeast corner of Elk Grove-Florin

More information

General Location Courtyard at LMH Final Development Plan and Final Plat

General Location Courtyard at LMH Final Development Plan and Final Plat R-1 LEYDEN RIDGE LOMA RIDGE LOBDELL R-3 MILLER PARKWAY LAUSSAC Subject Property R-3 LOCHENSHIRE LESMER R General Location Courtyard at LMH Final Development Plan and Final Plat ¹ 230 115 0 230 Feet Airport

More information