City of Lafayette Staff Report Design Review Commission

Transcription

1 City of Lafayette Staff Report Design Review Commission Meeting Date: September 25, 2017 Staff: Subject: Justin Giarritta, Contract Planner DR07-17 & TP17-17 Paul and Carole Breslin (Owners), R-40 Zoning: Request for: (1) Design Review; (2) Determination that the project is categorically exempt pursuant to Section of the California Environmental Quality Act; (3) Category II Tree Permit; and (4) Grading Permit to construct an 8,100-sq. ft. one-story residence with a maximum height of to the ridge on a vacant, unaddressed parcel located on Franklin Lane, APN Statutory Deadline: October 9, 2017 Summary The property owners seek to construct an 8,100-square foot one-story single family home, including a 1,300 sq. ft. attached garage, and a 500-square foot garden shed, on a vacant 40,206-square foot parcel on Franklin Lane. The action before the Design Review Commission is to consider a design review, a grading permit, and a tree permit. Story poles have been erected on site. Staff finds that the proposed project is in keeping with the City s Residential Design Guidelines. Therefore, staff is recommending approval of the project subject to the conditions discussed below and included in the draft resolution attached to this staff report. Background On June 18, 2012, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution approving minor subdivision MS creating four single-family residential lots with an un-surveyed remainder located at 1201 Franklin Lane. The subject property is the second lot of the four, as viewed from Happy Valley Road, and has been sold to the current property owners and project proponents. Triggers for Review Trigger Yes No Trigger Yes No Within a protected ridgeline setback? Grading > 50 cu. yards? Within 100-ft. of a ridgeline setback? DR required as condition of approval? In the Hillside Overlay District? In a commercial or MFR zone? Over 17-ft. in height to ridge? Variance requested? SFR Development > 6,000 sq. ft.? Tree Permit Requested? Creek Setback Determination? Subject to Public Art Ordinance?

2 Design Review Commission September 25, 2017 Staff Report DR07-17 Breslin DRC Comments and Applicant Responses The Design Review Commission reviewed this application at its August 28, 2017 meeting and provided the following comments: 1. Fence - Two layers of fences visually pushes the development closer to the street. Consider eliminating or find an alternative, less imposing fence for the front. One of the two fences has been removed from the plans. This is shown on sheet SP. 2. Fence - The fence along Franklin Lane needs to be set back at least 8 from the property line. The fence has been set backed 8 from front property line. This is shown on sheet SP. 3. Gate - The proposed gate would have a car queue within the public utility easement (PUE). The driveway shall not be gated- unless the design allows sufficient room for a vehicle to pull completely off the street and clear the PUE when the gates are closed. The swinging gate has been changed to a sliding gate that will move parallel to the PUE and has been set back to allow a car to queue outside of the PUE. This is shown on sheets SP and L Plate Heights - The plate heights throughout the house are high, increasing the massing of the home. Lower the plate heights throughout the property to reduce the mass and scale of the home on the street. The plates remain the same, but the height of the house drops by 2.5 via grading revisions. This is shown on sheets BS and C1. 5. Shed Height - The height of the garden shed in the rear is tall. Lowering the plate height of the shed by 2.5-ft (to nine feet) would lower height. The garden shed plate height has been reduced by 2 down to 9-7 This is shown on sheet EE3. 6. Steep Grades - Soften the grading by avoiding 2:1 slope cut or fill slopes. The entire site is mostly cut now (except for the SE corner which has a small 1.5 fill, effectively softening out the grade. This is shown on sheet C1. 7. Fill at SE Corner - The house sits on a flat pad with 3.5-ft fill at the south end of the property, increasing the height and massing. Revise grades, pad heights, plate heights, roof pitches, etc. to mitigate the height and massing. The pad heights throughout the property have been adjusted. The garden shed pad in the rear of the property was lowered to (previously the height was 463 ). The pad height of the main building was lowered to (previously the height was This is shown on sheet C1. 8. Drainage - The applicant should submit the site drainage design to the Water Board for review. The applicant submitted a site drainage plan to the Water Board for review and the correspondence supporting the design has been added to this report as Attachment E. 9. Trees - Replacement trees do not have to be Black Walnut s and can include the ten (10) 24 box Coast Live Oaks and five (5) 24 box Blue Oaks. The replacement trees plan includes ten (10) 24 box Coast Live Oaks and five (5) 24 Blue Oaks as originally submitted by the applicant. 10. Landscaping - Landscaping within the PUE shall be limited to only groundcover and shrubs not exceeding 30-inches mature height. All trees being planted will be planted outside of the PUE. Only smaller plants (not exceeding 30 inches in height) will be planted in the PUE. 11. PUE - There shall be no irrigation lines, electrical lines, or any other private improvements within the PUE. Page 2 of 3

3 Design Review Commission September 25, 2017 Staff Report DR07-17 Breslin CEQA The project was evaluated in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA ) and determined to be categorically exempt under Class 3: New construction or conversion of small structures - Section 15303, as the project consists of construction of one single family residence on a lot that is zoned for residential use. Final Action The Design Review Commission is the hearing authority for the subject application. Decisions of the Design Review Commission can be appealed to the Planning Commission pursuant to Section of the Lafayette Municipal Code within 14 calendar days of the action. Staff Recommendation Staff finds that the project complies with applicable codes and the City s residential design guidelines. Staff recommends that the Commission review the application, hold a public hearing, and adopt the attached resolution approving the project, subject to conditions. Attachments A. Maps and Aerial Photos B. DRAFT Resolution approving the project and Conditions of Approval (Exhibit A ) C. Design Review Staff Report D. DRAFT DRC Meeting Minutes from E. Site Drainage Design Correspondence F. Proposed plans received Page 3 of 3

4

5

6 DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION RESOLUTION BEFORE THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAFAYETTE APPROVING DR07-17 & TP17-17 Paul and Carole Breslin (Owners), R-40 Zoning: Request for: (1) Design Review; (2) Determination that the project is categorically exempt pursuant to Section of the California Environmental Quality Act; (3) Category II Tree Permit; and (4) Grading Permit to construct an 8,100-sq. ft. one-story residence with a maximum height of to the ridge on a vacant, unaddressed parcel located on Franklin Lane, APN WHEREAS, on June 6, 2017, Branagh Development filed an application, requesting review and approval of DR07-17 and TP17-17 allowing the development of a new 8,100 square foot one-story single family residence with a maximum height of with a maximum height of as described above, located at an unaddressed parcel located on Franklin Lane within the R- 40 zoning district; WHEREAS, on June 29, 2017, the application was deemed incomplete; WHEREAS, on July 28, 2017, the application was deemed complete; WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code, et seq.), the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, title 14, et seq.), and City of Lafayette s Local CEQA Guidelines (collectively, CEQA ), the City of Lafayette ( City ) is the lead agency for the proposed Project; WHEREAS, pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code, et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, title 14, et seq.) (collectively, CEQA ), the project as described above is Categorically Exempt pursuant to Section (New construction or conversion of small structures); WHEREAS, on September 11, 2017, the notice of the meeting date for this item was posted within 300 feet of the Project Site and mailed to property owners within a 300 foot radius of the Project Site. WHEREAS, on September 25, 2017, the Design Review Commission, following notification to the public in the prescribed manner, conducted a public hearing where it received written & oral testimony, including a staff report. WHEREAS, The Commission discussed the application and adopted Design Review Commission Resolution , finding the project exempt from CEQA and approving the application based on the required findings contained in this resolution and subject to conditions of approval as shown in Exhibit A. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT: 1. The Commission hereby finds that the recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated herein.

7 Design Review Commission DR07-17 & TP10-17 Breslin Resolution September 25, All the facts contained in the staff report of September 25, 2017 are hereby adopted as the Commission s own findings of fact and incorporated into this resolution by reference. 3. The required findings for the requested approval of the Design Review permit have been evaluated by the Commission as follows: 6-275(A) Residential Design Review Findings (1) The approval of the plan is in the best interest of the public health, safety and general welfare in that, the project is designed to comply with the development standards applicable to the project site including but not limited to height, setbacks, and permitted use. The project provides appropriate ingress and egress and is not anticipated to adversely impact the health, welfare, and safety of the neighborhood and broader community; (2) General site considerations, including site layout, open space and topography, orientation and location of buildings, vehicular access, circulation and parking, setbacks, height, walls, fences, public safety and similar elements have been designed to provide a desirable environment for the development in that, the project provides sufficient off-street parking spaces and driveway access to the proposed garage. The setbacks in the side and rear yards allow the project to maintain privacy of the existing neighbor while providing sufficient private open space for its future users. Additional front yard setback has been accounted added to allow for a future frontage pathway along Franklin Lane. The proposed fence has been moved eight (8) feet back from the front property line to provide a comfortable setback for users of the pathway. The project does not exceed the height limit and the project meets the other development standards of the underlying zoning district; (3) General architectural considerations, including the character, scale and quality of the design, the architectural relationship with the site and other buildings, building materials, colors, screening of exterior appurtenances, exterior lighting and signing and similar elements have been incorporated in order to ensure the compatibility of this development with its design concept and the character of adjacent buildings in that, the project is designed in a craftsman style that is complementary with the architectural style of existing homes in the neighborhood and blends in with the hillside to the northeast. The project proposes a one- story structure clad in stone veneer and stucco that is painted in warm colors which is consistent with the existing character of the neighborhood and blends in with the hillside to the northeast. The development footprint and overall scale of the project is greater than the immediate neighbors along Franklin Lane, Meadow Lane, and St. Francis; it is more consistent with homes in the greater Happy Valley neighborhood where lots are in the R-40 zoning district; and (4) General landscape considerations, including the location, type, size, color, texture and coverage of plant materials, provisions for irrigation, maintenance and protection of landscaped areas and similar elements have been considered to ensure visual relief, to complement buildings and structures and to provide an attractive environment for the enjoyment of the public in that, the project is proposing to mitigate some of the trees proposed to be removed as part of the project with a combination of native and ornamental Page 2 of 6

8 Design Review Commission DR07-17 & TP10-17 Breslin Resolution September 25, 2017 trees. The project proposes a landscaping scheme that predominantly consists of draught tolerant plant materials that add a variety of color to the landscaping and is complementary to the existing landscaping on the site and in the neighborhood (B) Single-Family Residential Findings Exceeding 6,000 Square Feet In addition to the findings required in Section 6-275(A), the hearing authority shall make the following findings for projects which occur in single-family residential zoning districts and exceeds 6,000 square feet in gross floor area as outlined in Section 6-272(A)(3): (1) The house substantially complies with the Residential Design Guidelines in that, The house complies with the City s residential design guidelines in that location, design, materials, scale, and architecture mitigate neighborhood impacts and provide a desirable project within its context; (2) The house is so designed that its mass will not appear significantly out of scale with the existing neighborhood in that, the house is designed as a one story structure with a significant setback so it does not appear out of scale with the existing neighborhood; (3) The house does not, because of its size, unduly impact, restrict or block significant views in that, the house will not block or restrict views given that it is one story on a relatively flat lot surrounded by tall vegetation; and (4) The house does not, because of its size, require removal of natural features, require excessive grading or cause the unnecessary removal of healthy tree(s) in that, the house does require the removal of several trees; however, some of the trees are in poor condition and are planned to be replaced with healthy new trees (C) Single-Family Residential Findings Exceeding 17-Feet in Height (1) The structure substantially complies with the Residential Design Guidelines in that, the proposed residence is to provide façade articulation to provide shadows and break up the massing, provides generous setbacks to provide neighbor privacy and a private outdoor recreational space, minimizes impact of mass and bulk by application of materials, color, and roof design, and appropriately setting the building on site consistent with the existing buildings in the neighborhood; (2) The structure is so designed that it will appear compatible with the scale and style of the existing neighborhood and will not significantly detract from the established character of the neighborhood in that, the proposed project provides articulation, porches, varied roof design, and a variety of colors and materials that is complementary to the existing single family homes in the neighborhood. While the proposed residence is larger than those currently existing in the neighborhood the project provides generous setback, articulated design, and appropriate landscaping that minimizes and makes the project complementary in scale to the homes existing in the neighborhood; Page 3 of 6

9 Design Review Commission DR07-17 & TP10-17 Breslin Resolution September 25, 2017 (3) The structure is so designed that it does not appear too tall or massive in relation to surrounding structures or topography when viewed from off-site in that, all the homes in the existing neighborhood are one story high. The proposed project is proposed at The project provides articulation of the walls and roof design in order to minimize impact of the perceived mass and scale; and; and (4) The structure is so designed that it does not unreasonably reduce the privacy or views of adjacent properties in that, the project is being developed on a relatively flat site and provides approximately 20 setback to the existing neighbor along the southwestern property line and a 20 setback to any future neighbor along the northeastern property line. The proposed home is designed to be a one story structure, and therefore does not have views from the home into the neighbor s property. The project also proposes appropriate landscaping and a perimeter fence to further mitigate any potential privacy impacts. The house is oriented to having a private open space towards the back property line away from the existing neighbors Permit category II: Protected tree on developed or undeveloped property associated with a development application. (1) Necessity for the pruning or removal in order to construct a required improvement on public property or within a public right-of-way or to construct an improvement that allows reasonable economic enjoyment of private property in that, proposal is to develop a newly created lot with a single family residence. The proposed tree removals are due to the location of the proposed home on the lot or due to the health of the tree. The project proposes to retain all remaining existing healthy trees on the site and appropriately mitigate the trees proposed to be removed; (2) Extent to which a proposed improvement may be modified to preserve and maintain a protected tree in that, the proposed project is designed to minimize the removal of the trees on site and while vegetation is proposed to be removed, the project proposes to retain all remaining existing healthy trees on the site and mitigate by planting replacement trees. Of the twenty-five (25) trees to be removed, twenty-two (22) of them have a low suitability for preservation; and; and (3) Extent to which a proposed change in the existing grade within the protected perimeter may be modified to preserve and maintain a protected tree in that, the proposal does not include change in the existing grade around the existing trees that are proposed to be retained. The project is conditioned to include appropriate protection and maintain the existing trees during construction Findings required for approval of grading exceeding 50 cubic yards (1) The grading will not endanger the stability of the site or adjacent property or pose a significant ground movement hazard to an adjacent property. The decision making authority may require the project geotechnical engineer to certify the suitability of the project supported by appropriate technical studies, including subsurface investigation in Page 4 of 6

10 Design Review Commission DR07-17 & TP10-17 Breslin Resolution September 25, 2017 that, the applicant submitted a geotechnical report with the application prepared by ENGEO Incorporated on June 6, 2017 that indicated the project is feasible provided that the recommendations outlined in the report are properly incorporated during construction of the residence; (2) The grading will not significantly increase erosion or flooding affecting the site or other property and will not cause impacts to riparian habitats, stream channel capacity or water quality that cannot be substantially mitigated in that, refer to finding 3-701(1), above; (3) The grading, when completed, will result in a building site that is visually compatible with the surrounding land in that, The proposed grading will conform to the existing flat land on the site; (4) The grading is sensitive to the existing landforms, topography and natural features on the site in that, the proposed grading is limited to the footprint of the residence and will not result in significant changes to the existing landforms, topography, or natural features on the site; and (5) The design of the project preserves existing trees on the site and trees on adjoining property to the extent possible in that, the parcel was assessed by Traverso Tree Service and per the recommendations in the arborist report, twenty-five (25) protected trees will be removed. Sixteen (16) trees are not worthy based on their existing condition and nine (9) are impacted by the new building. The applicant will be required by condition of approval to mitigate by planting replacement trees and paying an in-lieu fee for removing protected trees as part of the project. 4. Based on the review of the entire record before the Design Review Commission, the Commission finds and determines that the proposed project is exempt from environmental review under CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section (New construction or conversion of small structures), as the project consists of construction of one single family residence on a lot that is zoned for residential use. 5. Based on the above findings, the Design Review Commission hereby approves the request for approval of DR07-17 and TP17-17 for development of a new 8,100 square foot one-story single family residence with a maximum height of 21 10, and Tree Removal Permit to allow removal of up to twenty-five protected trees for property located on Franklin Lane, subject to the conditions, outlined in Exhibit A. 6. This resolution becomes effective upon its adoption. Page 5 of 6

11 Design Review Commission DR07-17 & TP10-17 Breslin Resolution September 25, 2017 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Design Review Commission of the City of Lafayette at a regular meeting held on the 25 th of September, 2017 by the following vote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: Niroop K. Srivatsa, Planning & Building Services Director Bob Cleaver, Chair Design Review Commission ATTACHMENT(S): Exhibit A Conditions of Approval Page 6 of 6

12 EXHIBIT A OF DRC RESOLUTION DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL DR07-17 BRESLIN Project specific conditions of approval are shaded ONGOING CONDITIONS 1. Development shall conform to the following approved plans including, but not limited to site plans, floor plans, elevations, details landscape plans, colors and materials, and exterior lighting fixtures received on July 28, 2017, on file at the City Offices, as modified by these conditions. 2. Pursuant to of the Lafayette Municipal Code, this approval shall expire one year from the approval date, unless a building permit has been issued for the project. The Planning & Building Department Director may extend the period to exercise the permit for up to one additional year, upon a showing of good cause, if such request is received in writing prior to the expiration date. 3. No changes shall be made to the approved plans or color and materials board without review and approval by the Planning & Building Department and/or appropriate commissions as determined by the Planning & Building Department Director. If changes are approved by the City, the property owner shall prepare three sets of revised plans for review and approval by the Planning & Building Department. Once the revised plans are stamped approved, the property owner shall submit the revised plans to the Lamorinda Building Inspection Office for their review and approval. 4. Construction plans shall conform to the approved design drawings. The property owner shall indicate to staff at the time of submittal for building permit plan check, any and all modifications, clarifications, or changes on the construction drawings from the approved design drawings. 5. Storage of construction materials, portable toilets and debris must be stored and staged on the subject property for this project. Temporary storage of construction boxes or construction materials must be kept on the property and out of any private easement or public right-of-way to permit emergency vehicle access during the construction project. 6. Site improvement and construction work, including set-up, loading or unloading of materials or equipment, or the maintenance, refueling or tune-up of any equipment, performed as part of this project is restricted to the hours between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. No noise-generating construction work shall be performed on weekends or national holidays. Violation of this condition may result in issuance of a Stop Work Order or administrative citations. 7. For properties within the Low-Density Residential District 5 (LR-5) or Low-Density Residential District 10 (LR-10) zoning districts, a Hillside Development Permit is hereby required for fencing other than agricultural-style open stranded wire fencing. This permit requirement pertains to fencing utilizing welded wire mesh. FOR STAFF USE ONLY Ongoing condition. Ongoing condition. Ongoing condition. Ongoing condition. Ongoing condition. Ongoing condition. Ongoing condition. Conditions of Approval DR07-17 Page 1 of 7

13 8. The applicant shall remove all story poles erected during the application review process within 30 days of final action on the application. Ongoing condition. 9. The applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Lafayette, its agents, officers, officials, and employees from all claims, demands, law suits, writs of mandamus, and other actions or proceedings (collectively Actions ) brought against the City or its agents, officers, officials, or employees to challenge, attack seek to modify, set aside, void or annul this approval. In the event the City becomes aware of any such action the City shall promptly notify the property owner and shall cooperate fully in the defense. It is expressly agreed that the City shall have the right to approve, which approval shall not be unreasonable withheld, the legal counsel providing the City s defense, and the property owner shall reimburse City for any costs and expenses directly and necessarily incurred by the City in the Course of the defense. 10. These conditions of Project Approval include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Under Government Code Section 66020(d)(1), these conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees and a description of the dedication, reservations, and other exactions which are imposed upon you. Under Government Code Sections 66020(a) & (d)(1), there is a 90-day period within which you may file and administrative protest of these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions. This 90-day period begins with the approval of the project. If you fail to file a protest with the City Clerk within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exaction. 11. If a project requires a grading permit, grading activities shall only be allowed between April 15 and October 1 to avoid the Fall and Winter rains. At the developer s risk, grading may begin as early as March 15 and continue past October 1, only if a rainy season action plan has been prepared and stormwater pollution prevention measures have been installed and certified as operational by the Project Engineer and the Contra Costa County Grading Inspector. 12. If the Planning & Building Department, either independently or as a result of complaints from the public, becomes aware that these conditions of approval are being violated, and Planning & Building Department staff is unable to obtain compliance or abatement, the City may issue a Stop Work Order and/or pursue administrative remedies pursuant to chapters 1-3 and 1-9 of the Lafayette Municipal Code. Administrative citations and fines may be issued for each day a violation occurs. 13. The proposed development shall comply with all applicable conditions of approval of the Subdivision (MS502-11) as adopted by Resolution of the City of Lafayette Planning Commission on June 18, Ongoing condition. Ongoing condition. Ongoing condition. Ongoing condition. Ongoing condition. Conditions of Approval DR07-17 Page 2 of 7

14 PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A GRADING, BUILDING, OR DEMOLITION PERMIT, WHICHEVER IS FIRST 14. The property owner shall duplicate these conditions of approval set forth in this document Exhibit A in the construction drawing plan sets for the benefit of the contractor(s), subcontractor(s), and inspector(s). All sheets in the construction drawings shall be the same size (e.g. 24 by 36 ). 15. The property owner shall submit a grading and drainage improvement plan to the City Engineer for review and approval. The review of construction drawings may necessitate additional revisions, as preliminary comments received from the City Engineer were based on conceptual design drawings. The grading and drainage plans shall address the following stormwater provisions: Plans shall indicate the location and design of all storm drainage facilities, including subsurface drains, detention basins, and drop structures. Detention basins, if determined to be necessary by the City Engineer, shall be constructed in conjunction with grading for the development. Roof drainage shall be directed across non-paved areas prior to entering the storm drain system or natural waterway. The path of drainage shall incorporate erosion control measures as necessary. Construction plans shall show the details and methods of construction for stormwater management site design features, measures to limit directly connected impervious area, pervious pavements, self-retaining areas, treatment BMPs, permanent source control BMPs, and other features that control stormwater flow and potential stormwater pollutants to the maximum extent practicable. For additional information, see the handout, Stormwater Quality Control Guidelines available from the Planning & Building Department or at > City Departments > Planning > Planning Handouts > Stormwater Quality Control Guidelines. Grading and improvement plans shall include stormwater pollution prevention plans for use during site development and building construction to mitigate impacts of this development. Plans shall include measures contained in the City s Construction Practices for Stormwater Pollution Prevention document available from the Planning & Building Department or at > City Departments > Public Works > Construction Practices for Stormwater Pollution Prevention. Plans shall indicate that No dumping drains to bay markings per City requirements will be installed at each stormwater drain inlet. 16. The property owner(s) shall enter into a standard landscape maintenance agreement with the City to install new and maintain existing landscaping, and preserve and protect the trees on the property as indicated on the plans. The project planner will prepare a standard landscape maintenance agreement and send it to the property owner(s). The agreement shall be signed and notarized and submitted to the Planning & Building Department to be recorded against the property. The agreement shall run with the property to ensure that future property owner(s) are aware of the Conditions of Approval DR07-17 Page 3 of 7

15 requirement for ongoing maintenance of the existing and approved landscaping. 17. The property owner shall show tree protection measures on the site plan and grading plan in the construction drawing plan sets, per the City standard tree fencing detail. A copy of this detail is available from Planning & Building Department staff or by visiting > City Departments > Planning > Planning Handouts > Tree Protection Guidelines. 18. The property owner shall install tree protection fencing around all trees to remain on the property in the vicinity of construction activity, as shown in the City s Tree Protection Guidelines. The property owner shall notify Planning & Building Department staff who will inspect the tree protection fencing to ensure they are installed in conformance with the Guidelines, and are substantial enough to reasonably protect the trees. The property owner is responsible for ensuring that tree protection measures remain intact throughout the construction process. Staff will conduct site inspections throughout the construction process without prior notice to the property owner or property owner. If the protection measures are damaged or otherwise removed, the project shall be subject to a stop work order until such time as corrective measures have been taken to the satisfaction of Planning & Building Department staff. Any trees identified on the plans to remain that are damaged or destroyed as a result of construction activities shall be replaced at a ratio and size deemed appropriate by the Planning & Building Department Director. 19. The property owner and applicant shall comply with Chapter 5-6, Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling if the project is determined to be a covered project as defined in Section 5-603, LMC. The applicant shall submit a Waste Management Plan (WMP) to the Planning & Building Department on greenhalosystems.com. The WMP packet may be downloaded from the City of Lafayette website > Planning & Permits > Waste Management Plan. 20. The property owner shall pay any outstanding balance on the project Planning Account and all applicable development fees for the approved project. Development fees include, but are not limited to: Parkland Fee (Chapter 6-16 LMC) Park Facilities Fee (Chapter 6-16 LMC) Park Fees Program Administration Fee (Chapter 6-16 LMC) Drainage Impact Fee (Chapter 8-17 LMC) Drainage Impact Fee Program Administration Fee ( LMC) Walkway Fee ( 8-113(d) LMC) Walkway Fee Program Administration Fee ( LMC) Lamorinda Sub-Regional Transportation Fee ( LMC) 21. Any noise-generating work, including set-up work, loading or unloading of materials or equipment, or the maintenance, refueling or tune-up of any equipment, either interior or exterior of the buildings, performed as part of the building of the project is restricted to the hours between 8:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m. Monday Friday and 10:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. on Saturdays Noise-generating work is not permitted on Sundays or federal holidays. Violations of this Conditions of Approval DR07-17 Page 4 of 7

16 condition may result in issuance of a Stop Work Order. This condition does not apply to the construction of public utilities. 22. The property owner shall obtain review and approval by the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District, which is located at 2010 Geary Road in Pleasant Hill. Construction drawings shall have the Fire Protection District stamp and signature prior to submitting to the Lafayette Planning & Building department. 23. The property owner shall obtain review and approval from the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District. Construction plans shall be stamped with the department s approval. The Central Sanitary District is located at 5019 Imhoff Place, in Martinez, and can be reached at (925) for requirements and permits. 24. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer for any work done within the City right-of-way. 25. Landscape and irrigations plans shall be designed to minimize irrigation and runoff, promote surface infiltration where appropriate, and minimize the use of fertilizers and pesticides that can contribute to stormwater pollution. 26. For projects subject to C.3 provisions, construction plans and/or improvement plans consistent with the approved Stormwater Control Plan shall be submitted to the Engineering Services Division for review and approval. The plans shall include drawings and specifications necessary to implement all measures in the approved Plan and include a completed Construction Plan C.3 Checklist as described in Step 10 of the Stormwater C.3 Guidebook available at If permanent stormwater and/or treatment control measures are being installed, the property owner shall submit a Storm Water Operation and Maintenance Plan consistent with Chapter 6 of the Clean Water Program s Storm Water C.3 Guidebook to the Engineering Services Division for review and approval. 28. If permanent stormwater and/or treatment control measures are being installed, the property owner shall enter into a standard City of Lafayette Stormwater Management Facilities Operations and Maintenance and Right of Entry Agreement. The project planner will prepare the standard agreement and send it to the property owner(s). The agreement shall be signed and notarized and submitted with a $5,000 bond to the Planning & Building Department to be recorded against the property. The agreement shall run with the property to ensure that future property owner(s) are aware of the requirement for ongoing maintenance of the permanent stormwater facilities. After satisfying three years of inspections and documentation, the City will return the bond. 29. For projects involving land disturbances of one (1) acre or more. Prior to issuance of a grading or demolition permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner shall submit to the Lafayette Engineering Services Division a copy of the Notice of Intent (NOI) sent to the State Water Resources Control Board and the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) prepared for the project, as required by the State s General Conditions of Approval DR07-17 Page 5 of 7

17 Construction Activity Permit. The SWPPP shall contain and the property owner shall implement, at a minimum, the measures contained in the City of Lafayette Minimum Construction Site Management Practices. Additional information on the NOI process and application forms can be obtained through the State website: Prior to issuance of the building permit, the applicant shall pay $3,943 as Tree Removal Mitigation Payment in-lieu of removing protected trees as part of the project. PRIOR TO RELEASE OF HOLD-ON-FRAMING STATUS 31. The property owner shall comply with the following: Review the project file and obtain copies as needed of the following: Approved external residential and landscape light fixtures and locations Approved colors and materials Approved landscape plans Conditions of approval Submit photo documentation verifying that the tree protection measures are intact in accordance to the plans (photos shall reflect current conditions) Sign the approved plans indicating that the above items were completed and that the property owner understands that the project will be completed in accordance to the approved plans 32. The property owner shall submit a certification letter from a California certified land surveyor or registered civil engineer, which verifies that development complies with the approved construction drawings. At the time of form inspection, the property owner shall submit the certification letter to Contra Costa County Building Inspection Department ( CCCBID ) inspector. A separate copy shall also be submitted to the Lafayette Planning & Building Department. For questions about this requirement, contact CCCBID for clarification. PRIOR TO RELEASE OF HOLD-ON-FINAL STATUS AND FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION 33. The property owner shall install approved landscaping according to the approved landscape plans prior to contacting the Lafayette Planning & Building Department to schedule an inspection. Species identification tags shall remain on trees, plants, and shrubs for the benefit of the planner conducting the final inspection. 34. The applicant shall submit a certification letter from the Landscape Architect, or the representative that prepared the approved landscape plan(s), which verifies that installed landscaping complies with the approved landscape plan(s), prior to contacting the Lafayette Planning & Building Department to schedule an inspection. The certification letter shall verify that the species, size, quantity, and location of approved trees, shrubs, and groundcover comply with the approved landscape plan(s). The certification letter shall also verify landscape lighting, fencing, irrigation, and other details as applicable. Once the certification letter has been submitted, the Conditions of Approval DR07-17 Page 6 of 7

18 project planner will also confirm the installation of the landscaping during the scheduled final inspection. 35. The applicant shall submit a copy of the invoice listing the landscaping plants ordered for the project. 36. The property owner shall contact the Lafayette Planning & Building Department at least 72 hours prior to requesting a final building inspection from the Contra Costa County Building Inspection Department. The property owner shall request an inspection of the project by Planning & Building Department staff to confirm that all conditions of approval have been met and that the project was constructed in accordance with approved plans. Planning & Building Department staff will release the Hold on the final building inspection when all conditions of approval have been met and a site inspection finds that the project was constructed in accordance with approved plans, including but not limited to siting, grading, retaining walls, tree protection measures, location of windows & doors, and building color. 37. The property owner and applicant shall comply with Chapter 5-6, Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling if this project was determined to be a covered project as defined in Section 5-603, LMC. Prior to final inspection of a grading, demolition, and/or building permit and within 30 days after project completion, the applicant shall submit the WMP to the City through Green Halo Systems for final review. 38. The property owner shall execute any agreements identified in the Stormwater Control Plan that pertain to the transfer of ownership and/or long-term maintenance of stormwater treatment or hydrograph modification BMPs. Post construction stormwater pollution prevention guidelines, approved by the City, shall be given to new owners prior to the transfer of any property. 39. All stormwater management facilities, including but not limited to, treatment BMPs, permanent source control BMPs, detention basins, drop structures, and No dumping drains to the Bay markings, shall be installed per the approved drainage plan. Improvement shall be inspected and certified by the project design engineer and the results forwarded to the Contra Costa County Grading Inspector. 40. If permanent stormwater and/or treatment control measures are being installed and the project is regulate, the property owner shall complete the Stormwater Facilities Information Log and submit it to the Planning & Building Department for review and approval. - end - Conditions of Approval DR07-17 Page 7 of 7

19 City of Lafayette Staff Report Design Review Commission Meeting Date: August 28, 2017 Staff: Subject: Justin Giarritta, Contract Planner DR07-17 & TP17-17 Paul and Carole Breslin (Owners), R-40 Zoning: Request for: (1) Design Review; (2) Determination that the project is categorically exempt pursuant to Section of the California Environmental Quality Act; (3) Category II Tree Permit; and (4) Grading Permit to construct an 8,100-sq. ft. one-story residence with a maximum height of to the ridge on a vacant, unaddressed parcel located on Franklin Lane, APN Statutory Deadline: August 21, 2017 Summary The property owners seek to construct an 8,100-square foot one-story single family home, with an attached garage, and a 500-square foot garden shed, on a vacant 40,206-square foot parcel on Franklin Lane. The action before the Design Review Commission is to consider a design review, a grading permit, and a tree permit. Story poles have been erected on site. Staff finds that the proposed project is in keeping with the City s Residential Design Guidelines. Therefore, staff is recommending approval of the project subject to the conditions discussed below and included in the draft resolution attached to this staff report. History On June 18, 2012, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution approving minor subdivision MS creating four single-family residential lots with an un-surveyed remainder located at 1201 Franklin Lane. The subject property is the second lot of the four, as viewed from Happy Valley Road, and has been sold to the current property owners and project proponents. On June 6, 2017, Branagh Development submitted an application to develop the lot into a one-story residence on behalf of the owners. Triggers for Review Trigger Yes No Trigger Yes No Within a protected ridgeline setback? Grading > 50 cu. yards? Within 100-ft. of a ridgeline setback? DR required as condition of approval? In the Hillside Overlay District? In a commercial or MFR zone? Over 17-ft. in height to ridge? Variance requested? SFR Development > 6,000 sq. ft.? Tree Permit Requested? Creek Setback Determination? Subject to Public Art Ordinance? Page 1 of 9

20 Proposal The 8,100 square feet of proposed development includes 6,300 square feet of living space, a 1,300 square foot three car garage and a 500 square foot garden shed. The residence consists of four bedrooms and five-and-one-half bathrooms. The proposed design for the house and garden shed in the rear suggests a craftsman architectural style with composite shingles on its complex roof line and stucco walls. Natural stone veneer is shown for the base of the home. The material application is carried across all four elevations. Site Conditions and Location The property is accessed on Franklin Ln. off of Happy Valley Rd. near Palo Alto Dr. and Meadow Ln. The property is not located within the Hillside Overlay District. The property is the second lot located on the northwest side of the street. The subject property is relatively flat, contains grassland and scattered trees. Location: MS Lot B - Franklin Lane (APN: ) Existing Development: Existing Vegetation: Topography: Lot Size: Zoning: Surrounding Uses: Vacant, with existing vegetation and a creek setback at the rear of the property Grassland, California Black Walnut s, Coastal Live Oaks, and Fruit Trees Relatively flat valley floor area with steeply sloped hills to the northeast 40,206 square feet Single-family Residential District 40 (R-40) Single-family residential uses to the southeast, southwest and northwest; open space and steeply sloped hills to the northeast. Staff Analysis and Comments Staff finds that the project is consistent with the City s Residential Design Guidelines as well as the General Plan land use, and zoning regulations as discussed in detail below. Consistency with the General Plan and Zoning The project is consistent with the underlying land use designation as single family residential land use, which is a permitted use. The zoning for the subject property is Single-family Residential District-40 (R- 40). The project s consistency with the zoning standards is outlined in the following table: R-40 Development Standards Proposal Lot Area Min 40,000 square feet 40,206 square feet Maximum Height Side yard setback Min (Northeastern) Side yard setback Min (Southwestern) Front yard setback Principal frontage = Min 25 ; Principal frontage = 47-6 ; Rear yard setback Min Parking Min two spaces Three spaces in an enclosed garage Page 2 of 9

21 Consistency with the Residential Design Guidelines In order to approve the subject application, the Design Review Commission must find that the proposed development substantially complies with the City s Residential Design Guidelines. Staff s review finds that the design does comply with the guidelines, notably: Privacy and Neighborhood Impacts: The home is set back from Franklin Lane 47-6 and contains a vegetative buffer and fencing along the front property line. The home is one-story and is positioned near the middle of the lot. The side yard is setback to the southwest to mitigate potential privacy impacts to current neighbors and is setback to the northeast to mitigate potential privacy impacts to future neighbors. The neighbors behind the home are protected by a vegetative buffer, and a rear yard setback of The location and separation from adjacent structures, along with the fencing and vegetation, sufficiently mitigate any potential privacy impacts. The subdivision which created the lot was conditioned to install a pathway along the project frontage when the remainder parcel to the east is developed, connecting to Happy Valley Road. The subject application proposes a wall and fence right at the back-of-future-pathway. Staff recommends moving the wall and fence three (3) feet back from what is currently proposed to accommodate a modest setback from the pathway. This area should be landscaped to soften the presence of the wall and fence from pedestrians and drivers. Landscaping: The applicant submitted an Arborist Report, prepared by Hort Science Inc. dated, May 15, The report identifies 38 trees on the property. Trees onsite include California Black Walnut, Coastal Live Oak, Plum, Apple, Pear, Persimmon, Olive, and Privet. A total of twenty-five (25) trees are shown on the site plan to be removed. The arborist indicates that sixteen (16) of these trees are in poor condition and are not worth maintaining based on their existing condition. An additional nine (9) trees will be removed as they are within the new development footprint. Of these nine (9) trees, six (6) are not suitable for preservation. The remaining three (3) trees are moderately suitable for preservation. Of the twenty-five (25) trees being removed, six (6) trees have diameters less than 6 inches and would not require a tree permit. The remaining trees are California Black Walnut and Fruit Trees. One Coastal Live Oak is not suitable for preservation. The remaining Coastal Live Oaks on the property will be preserved. The applicant has submitted a replacement tree plan that includes ten (10) 24 box Coastal Live Oaks and five (5) 24 box Blue Oaks. Staff would recommend planting ten (10) California Black Walnuts and five (5) Coastal Live Oaks instead due to their presence throughout the subdivision and into the hillside. Sheets L-3 and L-4 provide a planting plan and a tree mitigation plan respectively. The applicant will be required by condition of approval to mitigate by planting replacement trees and paying an in-lieu fee for removing protected trees as part of the project. Size and Scale: The height of the new home is proposed at which is within the 35 maximum height limit in the R-40 Zoning District. The proposed design is articulated to provide shadows and breakup massing. The façade includes architectural pop-outs and decorative window trim to create articulation within the massing. Portions of the rood also shed forward with decorative wood corbels and kickers to break up long expanses. Page 3 of 9

22 Sheet BS Building Sections provides projects cross-sections. A more accurate representation of the design in context with the environment is provided by story poles at the site. Materials and Colors: Materials include durable products like stone and stucco. The roof is composed of high quality black composite shingles complemented by bronze standing seam metal roofs to break up the massing. Wood paneling at the windows provides extra articulation and detailing as elements at a smaller scale. The body paint color is Young Colt (a brown/gray). The house is lit by cast aluminum dark-sky compliant fixtures. The colors are consistent with the hillside to the northeast the materials are consistent with the neighborhood to the southeast. The materials and colors of the garden shed in the rear yard are consistent with the house. CEQA The project was evaluated in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA ) and determined to be categorically exempt under Class 3: New construction or conversion of small structures - Section 15303, as the project consists of construction of one single family residence on a lot that is zoned for residential use. Public Comment, Outreach, and Notice Property owners within a 300-foot radius of the subject property were mailed a notice of public hearing, and the immediate area was posted at least ten days prior to the scheduled public hearing. Staff has received one public comment and the comment received is attached to this report. According to the applicant, a version of the proposed design was presented to the neighbors on May 25, The applicant said the neighbors noted an appreciation for the one-story design, size of the home, and materials selection. Additionally, the neighbors were pleased with the landscaping and planting selections and how they blended in with the adjacent properties. The neighbors did not express any further concern. Agency Response The project was referred to the Contra Costa County Building Inspection Department, Contra Costa County Fire Protection District, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, East Bay Municipal Utility District, and the City Engineer. The following comments were received at the time this staff report was prepared: City Engineer: 1. This project is part of a subdivision that received contingent approval from the State Water Board, pending subsequent detailed review of stormwater treatment design of each individual lot of the subdivision. The applicant should submit the site drainage design to the Water Board for review prior to submittal to Lafayette. Lafayette should not consider processing the application until it receives at least conceptual approval of the site drainage design from the Water Board, lest time is wasted on a site layout that is required to be substantially altered later. 2. The project driveway needs to account for a future sidewalk within the PUE along the Franklin Lane frontage. Cross-slopes in this area shall not exceed 1.5%. 3. The driveway shall not be gated- remotely controlled, automatic, or otherwise unless the design allows sufficient room for a vehicle to pull completely off the street and clear the PUE when the gates are closed. Page 4 of 9

23 4. Landscaping within the PUE shall be limited to only groundcover and shrubs not exceeding 30 inches mature height. There shall be no trees planted within 10 feet of the PUE. There shall be no irrigation lines, electrical lines, or any other private improvements within the PUE. Contra Costa County Building Inspection: No comments on the application at this time. East Bay Municipal Utility District: If additional water service is needed, the project sponsor should contact EBMUD s New Business Office and request a water service estimate to determine the costs and conditions of providing additional water service to the development. Engineering and installation of water meters requires substantial lead time which should be provided for in the projects sponsor s development schedule. No water meters are allowed to be located in driveways. The project sponsor should be aware that Section 21 of EBMUD s Water Service Regulations requires that water service shall not be furnished for new or expanded service unless all the applicable water-efficiency measures described in the regulation are installed at the project sponsor s expense. Due to EBMUD s limited water supply, all customers should plan for shortages in time of drought. Central Contra Costa Sanitary District: According to Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (Central San) records, the project site is within Central San s service area. Sanitary sewer service is available to the east side of the project site via an eight-inch diameter public main sewer on Franklin Lane. When that sewer was constructed in 1959, a service lateral was stubbed out to the property, approximately 116 feet south of the northern property line. If this lateral is to be used, it needs a television inspection due to age. If his lateral is not going to be used, it must be properly abandoned after obtaining a Central San permit. The proposed residence would not be expected to produce an unmanageable added capacity demand on the wastewater system, nor interfere with existing facilities. The applicant must submit full-size improvement plans for Central San Permit staff to review and pay all appropriate fees. Final Action The Design Review Commission is the hearing authority for the subject application. Decisions of the Design Review Commission can be appealed to the Planning Commission pursuant to Section of the Lafayette Municipal Code within 14 calendar days of the action. Findings The approval of this application requires the Design Review Commission to make findings for Design Review, structures over 17 in height, residences exceeding 6,000 square feet, grading permit and tree removal, which are listed below (A) Residential Design Review Findings (1) The approval of the plan is in the best interest of the public health, safety and general welfare in that, the project is designed to comply with the development standards applicable to the project site including but not limited to height, setbacks, and permitted use. The project provide appropriate ingress and egress and is not anticipated to adversely impact the health, welfare, and safety of the neighborhood and broader community; Page 5 of 9

24 (2) General site considerations, including site layout, open space and topography, orientation and location of buildings, vehicular access, circulation and parking, setbacks, height, walls, fences, public safety and similar elements have been designed to provide a desirable environment for the development in that, the project provides sufficient off-street parking spaces and driveway access to the proposed garage. The setbacks in the side and rear yards allow the project to maintain privacy of the existing neighbor while providing sufficient private open space for its future users. Additional front yard setback should be added to allow for future frontage pathway along Franklin Lane. The fence should be moved six (6) feet back from its proposed location in the front yard to provide a comfortable setback for users of the pathway. The project does not exceed the height limit and the project meets the other development standards of the underlying zoning district; (3) General architectural considerations, including the character, scale and quality of the design, the architectural relationship with the site and other buildings, building materials, colors, screening of exterior appurtenances, exterior lighting and signing and similar elements have been incorporated in order to ensure the compatibility of this development with its design concept and the character of adjacent buildings in that, the project is designed in a craftsman style that is complementary with the architectural style of existing homes in the neighborhood and blends in with the hillside to the northeast. The project proposes a one- story structure clad in stone veneer and stucco that is painted in warm colors which is consistent with the existing character of the neighborhood and blends in with the hillside to the northeast. The development footprint and overall scale of the project is greater than the immediate neighbors along Franklin Lane, Meadow Lane, and St. Francis; it is more consistent with homes in the greater Happy Valley neighborhood where lots are in the R-40 zoning district. (4) General landscape considerations, including the location, type, size, color, texture and coverage of plant materials, provisions for irrigation, maintenance and protection of landscaped areas and similar elements have been considered to ensure visual relief, to complement buildings and structures and to provide an attractive environment for the enjoyment of the public in that, the project is proposing to mitigate some of the trees proposed to be removed as part of the project with a combination of native and ornamental trees. The project proposes a landscaping scheme that predominantly consists of draught tolerant plant materials that add a variety of color to the landscaping and is complementary to the existing landscaping on the site and in the neighborhood (B) Single-Family Residential Findings Exceeding 6,000 Square Feet In addition to the findings required in Section 6-275(A), the hearing authority shall make the following findings for projects which occur in single-family residential zoning districts and exceeds 6,000 square feet in gross floor area as outlined in Section 6-272(A)(3): (1) The house substantially complies with the Residential Design Guidelines; The house complies with the City s residential design guidelines in that location, design, materials, scale, and architecture mitigate neighborhood impacts and provide a desirable project within its context. (2) The house is so designed that its mass will not appear significantly out of scale with the existing neighborhood; The house is designed as a one story structure with a significant setback so it does not appear out of scale with the existing neighborhood. Page 6 of 9

25 (3) The house does not, because of its size, unduly impact, restrict or block significant views; and The house will not block or restrict views given that it is one story on a relatively flat lot surrounded by tall vegetation. (4) The house does not, because of its size, require removal of natural features, require excessive grading or cause the unnecessary removal of a healthy tree(s). The house does require the removal of several trees; however, some of the trees are in poor condition and are planned to be replaced with healthy new trees (C) Single-Family Residential Findings Exceeding 17-Feet in Height (1) The structure substantially complies with the Residential Design Guidelines in that, the proposed residence is to provide façade articulation to provide shadows and break up the massing, provides generous setbacks to provide neighbor privacy and a private outdoor recreational space, minimizes impact of mass and bulk by application of materials, color, and roof design, and appropriately setting the building on site consistent with the existing buildings in the neighborhood; (2) The structure is so designed that it will appear compatible with the scale and style of the existing neighborhood and will not significantly detract from the established character of the neighborhood in that, the proposed project provides articulation, porches, varied roof design, and a variety of colors and materials that is complementary to the existing single family homes in the neighborhood. While the proposed residence is larger than those currently existing in the neighborhood the project provides generous setback, articulated design, and appropriate landscaping that minimizes and makes the project complementary in scale to the homes existing in the neighborhood; (3) The structure is so designed that it does not appear too tall or massive in relation to surrounding structures or topography when viewed from off-site in that, all the homes in the existing neighborhood are one story high. The proposed project is proposed at The project provides articulation of the walls and roof design in order to minimize impact of the perceived mass and scale; and (4) The structure is so designed that it does not unreasonably reduce the privacy or views of adjacent properties in that, the project is being developed on a relatively flat site and provides approximately 20 setback to the existing neighbor along the southwestern property line and a 20 setback to any future neighbor along the northeastern property line. The proposed home is designed to be a one story structure, and therefore does not have views from the home into the neighbor s property. The project also proposes appropriate landscaping and a perimeter fence to further mitigate any potential privacy impacts. The house is oriented to having a private open space towards the back property line away from the existing neighbors Permit category II: Protected tree on developed or undeveloped property associated with a development application. (1) Necessity for the pruning or removal in order to construct a required improvement on public property or within a public right-of-way or to construct an improvement that allows reasonable economic enjoyment of private property in that, the proposal is to develop a newly created lot with a single family residence. The proposed tree removals are due to the location of the proposed home on the lot or due to the health of the tree. The project proposes to retain all remaining existing Page 7 of 9

26 healthy trees on the site and appropriately mitigate the trees proposed to be removed; (2) Extent to which a proposed improvement may be modified to preserve and maintain a protected tree in that, the proposed project is designed to minimize the removal of the trees on site and while vegetation is proposed to be removed, the project proposes to retain all remaining existing healthy trees on the site and mitigate by planting replacement trees. Of the twenty-five (25) trees to be removed, twenty-two (22) of them have a low suitability for preservation; and (3) Extent to which a proposed change in the existing grade within the protected perimeter may be modified to preserve and maintain a protected tree in that, the proposal does not include change in the existing grade around the existing trees that are proposed to be retained. The project is conditioned to include appropriate protection and maintain the existing trees during construction Findings required for approval of grading exceeding 50 cubic yards 1. The grading will not endanger the stability of the site or adjacent property or pose a significant ground movement hazard to an adjacent property. The decision making authority may require the project geotechnical engineer to certify the suitability of the project supported by appropriate technical studies, including subsurface investigation; The applicant submitted a geotechnical report with the application prepared by ENGEO Incorporated on June 6, 2017 that indicated the project is feasible provided that the recommendations outlined in the report are properly incorporated during construction of the residence. 2. The grading will not significantly increase erosion or flooding affecting the site or other property and will not cause impacts to riparian habitats, stream channel capacity or water quality that cannot be substantially mitigated; Refer to finding 3-701(1), above. 3. The grading, when completed, will result in a building site that is visually compatible with the surrounding land; The proposed grading will conform to the existing flat land on the site. 4. The grading is sensitive to the existing landforms, topography and natural features on the site; and The proposed grading is limited to the footprint of the residence and will not result in significant changes to the existing landforms, topography, or natural features on the site. 5. The design of the project preserves existing trees on the site and trees on adjoining property to the extent possible. The parcel was assessed by Traverso Tree Service and per the recommendations in the arborist report, twenty-five (25) protected trees will be removed. Sixteen (16) trees are not worthy based on their existing condition and nine (9) are impacted by the new building. The applicant will be required by condition of approval to mitigate by planting replacement trees and paying an in-lieu fee for removing protected trees as part of the project. Page 8 of 9

27 Project-Specific Conditions Based on the discussion above, staff is recommending the following project-specific conditions in addition to standard conditions of approval. Move the fence back 6-ft. from its current location to provide a comfortable setback for pathway users. Eliminate the vehicular gate based on the City Engineer s comments. Staff Recommendation Staff finds that the project complies with applicable codes and the City s residential design guidelines, as modified by the draft conditions of approval. Staff recommends that the Commission review the application, hold a public hearing, and adopt the attached resolution approving the project, subject to conditions. Attachments A. Maps and Aerial Photos B. Resolution approving the project and Conditions of Approval (Exhibit A ) C. Franklin Lane Subdivision Resolution and MS Conditions of Approval D. MS Map E. MS RWQCB Exhibits F. Project Arborist Report G. Project Arborist Report Addendum H. Public comments I. Geotechnical Exploration (available online, hard-copies available upon request) J. Proposed plans received Page 9 of 9

28 City of Lafayette DRAFT MINUTES Design Review Commission Lafayette Library & Learning Center August 28, Mt. Diablo Blvd., Arts & Science Discovery Center 7:00 PM 1. The meeting was called to order at 7:02 p.m. by Commission Chair Bob Cleaver. 2. Commissioners present: Commission Chair Bob Cleaver, Commissioners Anko Chen, Patrick Collins and Ritch Voss. One vacancy exists. Staff: Justin Giarritta, Contract Planner; Sarah Allen, Senior Planner; Greg Wolff, Assistant Planning Director 3. PUBLIC COMMENT: None 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: None 5. STUDY SESSIONS: None 6. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS: None 7. NEW PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. DR07-17 & TP17-17 Paul and Carole Breslin (Owners), R-40 Zoning: Request for Design Review to construct an 8,135-sq. ft. single-story residence with a maximum height of 23-9" on a vacant, unaddressed parcel on Franklin Lane, APN Recommendation: Conduct the public hearing and adopt Resolution finding the project exempt from CEQA and approving the project, subject to conditions. Project Planner: Justin Giarritta Mr. Giarritta reported the subject lot was part of a four-lot subdivision approved in 2012 (Lots A, B, C and D). Lot A has an existing home, Lot B is the subject property, and Lots C and D are yet to be developed. The plan is to develop the lot with a new single-story 8,100-s.f., 5-bedroom, 5.5 bathroom home with a 3-car garage. The house will have a maximum height with a mixture of 5:12 and 6:12 roof pitches. The applicants also propose a 500 s.f. garden shed in the rear yard with similar materials to the proposed home. The project will require a tree permit to remove existing trees and a grading permit for 3.5 of cut at the north corner and 3.5 of fill in the south corner. Design Review Commission Minutes Page 1 of 15 August 28, 2017