HomeMy WebLinkAboutTC Agd Pkt 1998-05-06
m~
TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL
AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING
TOWN OF TIBURON
1505 TIBURON BLVD.
MEETING DATE:
MEETING TIME:
CLOSED SESSION:
MAY 6, 1998
7:30 P.M.
7:00 P.M.
PLEASE NOTE: In order to give all interested persons an opportunity to be heard, and to ensure the presentation of all points otview, members
of the audience should:
(1) Always Address the Chair; (2) Stat. Name and Address; (3) State Views Succinctly; (4) Limtt Presentations to 3 minutes; (5) Speak Directly into
Microphone.
A. ROLL CALL
B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
CUB SCOUT PACK NO, 48 - (Vasco Marais, Assistant Cubmaster)
C. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ACTION (If any)
D, PUBLIC OUESTIONS AND COMMENTS
Please confine your comments during this portion a/the agenda to matters not a/ready on this agenda. other than items on
the Consent Calendar. The public will be given an opportunity to speak on each agenda item at the time it is called.
Presentations are limited /0 three (3) minutes. Matters requiring action will be referred to the appropriate Commission,
Board. Committee or Staff for consideration and/or placed on a future meeting agenda.
E. RECOGNITION FOR TOWN SERVICE
1. TIBURON WEB SITE - (Bob & Bonnie Fraik, Owners of Digital Foundry; Dave Cole,
Webmaster)
F. COUNCIL, COMMISSION & COMMITTEE REPORTS
2. NEW TffiURON POLICE STATION, (Building Advisory Committee Status Report)
3. STRAWBERRY ANNEXATION MEETING (Status Report Mayor Matthews)
4. TIBURON PROPERTY OWNERS' ASSOCIATION WORKSHOP - (Mayor Matthews)
5. DOWNTOWN MAIN STREET TASK FORCE (Vice,Mayor Bach)
G. APPOINTMENTS TO COMMISSIONS, BOARDS, COMMITTEES
PARKS & OPEN SPACE COMMISSION - (Fill Current Vacancy)
H. CONSENT CALENDAR
The purpose of the Consent Calendar is to group items together which generally do not require discussion and which will
probably be approved by one motion unless separate action is required on a particular item. Any member of the Town
Council, Town Staff, or the Public may request removal of an item for discussion
6. TOWN COUNCIL MINUTES - #1136, April I, 1998 - (Adopt)
7. TOWN MONTHLY INVESTMENT SUMMARY - (March 31, 1998)
I. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
8. TWO (2) YEAR MUNICIPAL BUDGET - (Finance Director's Recommended Public Hearing
Dates)
J. NEW BUSINESS
9. MILL V ALLEY REFUSE SERVICE (Status of Service Rates & Waste Diversion Program)
K. PUBLIC HEARING
10. APPLICATION TO DESIGNATE NEW PRIVATE ROAD - "High Meadow Lane," (for
properties currently located at 94 SugarloafDrive); AP Nos. 58-100-54 & 58-281-04 _ (David
and Janet Taylor, Applicants)
II. CONSIDERATION OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT: Negative Declaration and
Settlement Agreement Granting Subdivision of One Parcel into 3 Lots at 885B, C & D
Tiburon Boulevard; AP No. 55-261-11 - (Dixon and Sharon Power, Applicants)
12. MARIN ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE, Amend Chapter 20 of Town Municipal Code
to Incorporate Changes to Title 8 of Marin County Code Re: Housing of Wild or
Undomesticated Animals in Areas Zoned Residential. (2nd Reading & Adoption)
L, COMMUNICA nONS
13. GOLDEN GATE TRANSIT - Ferry Feeder Bus Service - (Councilmember Thompson)
M. STAFF & TOWN MANAGER REPORTS
14. DOWNTOWN FERRY DOCK REALIGNMENT PROJECT GRANT APPLICATION _
(Town Engineer Status Report)
15. ELEPHANT ROCK REPAIRS - (Town Engineer Status Report)
N, ADJOURNMENT
Future A~enda Items - Appointments to Library Board of Trustees - (June 3)
PG&E Response to Blackie's Pasture Undergrounding Project Over Charges
DATE OF MEETING:
May 6, 1998
No, 10,98
DATE POSTED:
Mav 1. 1998
NOTICE OF STATUTORY AUTHORITY FOR HOLDING
CLOSED MEETING OF THE TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL
Pursuant to California Government Code Sections 54950 et seq., the Town Council will hold a
Closed Session, More specific information regarding this meeting is indicated below:
I. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR. (Section 54957 6)
Agency Negotiator:
Austris Rungis
A.
Employee Organization:
MAPE (Marin Association of Public
Employees)
B.
Employee Organization:
TPA (Tiburon Police Association)
DATE: MAY 6, 1998
ITEM: 2
TOW N
0'_
RON
MEMO
T I B U
To:
Larry Smith
Jim Wilson
John Kern
John Hoffmire
Sia Barmand
Peter Herley
Tom Aiello
Tony Iacopi
Scott AndeTson
From:
Subject:
Date:
Town Manager
New Police Building & Senior Housing Project Progress Meeting #17
Meeting Date & Time - Wed, May 6,1998 @ 10:30 AM Conference Room
AGENDA
I, Senior Housing DDA Agreement - Final Draft Status (Scott)
-- WebbeTlBurman Final Inclusions
-- Schedule DDA for approval by Redevelopment Agency
2. New Police Building Final Design & Bid Schedule (Bob)
--May 4 - Receive 90% Working Drawings
--May 6 - BAC Committee Status Report to Town Council
--May 15 - Completed Final In-House Design Review
--May 15 - Building Dept has Completed Plan Check Review
,-May 18 to 22, Final Corrections/Revisions to Working Drawings
--May 22 - Advertize/Out for Bids
--June 9 - Bid Opening
--June 15, Special Meeting of Town Council to Award Contract
3 Project Bid Documents &Bid Schedule (Jim)
4. Old Town Hall (Tony)
-- TTee Removal Progress
,-Building Demolition Bids
--Reconnect Utilities to Police Building
5. Final Offsite Design & Utilities (Sia)
6, Other Items, Questions or Concerns --- Next Meeting Wednesday, May 13, 1998
DRAFT
"
_~...;~~;F~t~ ~
~',.J, ' >~::C)
\,'7<'. _, ::,,~"';'
-:':',0('-0' -' v..../
~ "- I?NIA \~",,-::!
,
.
DATE: MAY 6, 1998
ITEM: 4
TO:
TIBURON HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION PRESIDENTS
FROM:
MAYOR HARRY S. MATTHEWS
DATE:
MAY 7,1998
The Town has just completed its first productive year of opeTations in its new Town Hall
facilities. The Administrative, Planning, Building and Recreation functions of the Town have
been well served by the new offices, The Council Chambers and Community meeting room are
actively utilized by the public and have been a tremendous asset.. The new Library has likewise
been a very positive addition to our Downtown Civic Center site.
There are currently many issues and activities being considered by Town Officials, and I am
certain that you may have comments or suggestions that you would like to discuss with the Town
Council.
On behalf of the Town Council, which is a Telatively new Council, I would like to invite you to a
Town Council/Homeowners Association workshop on Tuesday, June 2, 1998 from 7:30,9:30
P.M. in the upstairs Community Room at Town Hall.
This wOTkshop is designed to be very informal in nature and an opportunity for Tepresentatives
from the various Tiburon neighborhoods to expTess their opinions, priorities and suggestions
regarding Tiburon issues and activities, The Town would appreciate you informing your
Association members of this workshop as we hope to have Tepresentatives from each of the
Associations attend.
To ensure that we have sufficient space, please R,S.V,P, to Joan Palmero at Town Hall, 1505
Tiburon Blvd, (435-7373).
Harry S, Matthews, Mayor
Town of Tiburon
/shm
DRAFT
ITEM: 6
TOWN COUNCIL
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Matthews called the regular meeting of the Town Council of the town of Tiburon to order
at 7:52 p.m, on Wednesday, April I, 1998, at Town Hall Council Chambers, 1505 Tiburon
Boulevard, Tiburon, California,
A. ROLL CALL
PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
Bach, Gram, Hennessy, Thompson, Matthews
EX OFFICIO:
Town Manager Kleinert, Town Attorney Danforth,
Planning Director Anderson, Senior Planner
Watrous, Town Engineer Barmand, Town Clerk
Crane
B. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ACTION (If any)
Mayor Matthews said there was nothing to report from the closed session.
C. PUBLIC OUESTIONS AND COMMENTS
Mr. Nacio, 149 Blackfield Drive, said someone had put 10 gallons of gravel and cement on the
street next to his driveway, which had gotten allover his cars. He said when he attempted to find
out who was responsible for placing the materials there, he got the run-around from both of his
neighbors but later determined that it was Mrs, Mindy Blauer. He then complained to the Town
[Public Works Department] who allegedly removed the materials and put other gravel down, He
also said there was a 10 x 3 foot hole in the street in front of his house.
D. COUNCIL. COMMISSION & COMMITTEE REPORTS
1) BELVEDERE/TffiURONLffiRARY AGENCY - (Annual Report),
Carol Forrell, Library Board Chair, said she was available for questions. Councilmember
Hennessy said it was an excellent report.
E. CONSENT CALENDAR
2) TOWN COUNCIL MINUTES ,No. 1134, March 4, 1998 - (Adopt),
Councilmember Gram asked for a change to Item No, 7, page 5, to reflect that when It.
Recreation managed McKegney Green they ensured that" all three portions [of the Green] , . .
were not all tied up at once," Gram clarified that this referred to the middle and two ends of the
Green.
3)
4)
MONTHLY POLICE STATISTICS - February, 1998 - (Accept)
AMICUS REQUEST: Santa Monica Beach Ltd. V. Superior Court, Supreme Court Case
NO. S082924 -(Approve)
MOTION: To Adopt Consent Calendar, as amended.
Moved: Hennessy, Seconded by Thompson
Vote: AYES: Unanimous
Town Council Minutes #1136
April 1, 1998
Page 1
F, NEW BUSINESS
5) MARIN COUNTY SALES TAX MEASURE - PROPOSAL FOR NOVEMBER, 1998
ELECTION - (presentation by Marin County Assistant Planning Director Carol Williams).
Ms. Williams said she was representing the Countywide Planning Agency and the Transportation
Steering Committee, She said they were seeking an endorsement for the proposed ballot measure
to increase the Marin County sales tax by one, half cent.
Ms. Williams said the sales tax was the most advantageous source of revenue which would
generate $300,000,000 over 20 years, During public opinion surveys, 75% of the voters said they
would support the advisory measure ("A") and 58% said they would support the tax increase,
The projects would include a Marin segment of [light] rail service to San Rafael (with a later
extension to Larkspur), expand local bus services, offer new shuttles and ride-share programs for
West Marin, and complete the HOV car pool lanes in the 101 corridor. They would also include
transportation programs for senior and disabled people, and would improve bike paths and
facilities.
Councilmember Thompson asked whether local streets were included in the proposal, Ms,
Williams said the Steering Committee was not recommending them for specific inclusion, but that
it was up to the local jurisdiction to decide how to spend their portion of the funds.
Thompson said some of the funds should be used to preserve the Tiburon bike path,
Mayor Matthews asked about the impact of Prop. 218 on the proposed tax, Ms, Williams said
that the trial court had upheld a similar tax measure which passed in Santa Clara by a 51 % vote,
but that the decision had been appealed.
Councilmember Gram asked what was "in it" for Southern Marin. Ms. Williams said that 1)
everyone uses Highway 101, 2) local transit service would be improved, 3) local streets could be
improved, and 4) everybody benefits from a county,wide effort to improve transportation,
Gram said he supported the measure but thought it important to be able to respond to questions
from citizens in Southern Marin.
Supervisor Annette Rose said that MTC monies and the Golden Gate Bridge District paid for
commuter buses, but not transportation improvements included in the tax measure. She said that
20% of the morning traffic in Marin County was school-oriented, and that more buses were
needed.
Supervisor Rose also said that previous measures failed because they were associated with [pro-]
growth, but that the proposed tax measure included funds to be used to acquire additional open
space within the County. Because of these factors, and because the tax was not just a transit tax,
it would be considered a general rather than a special tax, according to Rose.
Town Council Minutes #1136
April 1,1998
Page 2
Councilman John Leonard from Mill Valley also made a brief presentation. He said there was an
obligation for leadership from the Town Councils in that everyone wanted to maintain the quality
oflife in the County, create affordable housing and jobs, and not sustain too much development,
Leonard said this measure was the best plan he had seen so far.
Councilmember Thompson said he supported the concept while he was on the Marin Economic
Commission as a way [improved transportation] to keep business in Marin County.
Thompson pointed out that the Tiburon multi-use path was heavily used by many people outside
of the immediate area as a way to connect to San Francisco and Mill Valley,
Councilmember Bach said the traffic situation in the East Bay was getting worse and he feared the
same for the County. However, he said he had reservations about the tax measure but stated that
there was not much choice, He doubted whether people in Marin County would go for public
transportation, and warned against building "grandiose" train stations. He said that European
[ commuter] stations often consisted of only a platform and were heavily used,
Councilmember Hennessy said she would like to see more local streets [improvements] included
in the plan, She also said she would not support certain land acquisitions [in Fairfax] if they
benefitted only the local community.
In response to Councilmember Hennessy's question about whether specific open space parcels
had been earmarked for purchase, Supervisor Rose said that the money would to to the Marin
County Open Space Commission for parcels to be chosen as the need prevailed, She said some of
the purchases could be baylands, as welL
Rose also stated that Sir Francis Drake Boulevard was one of the most heavily traveled arterial
roads in the County and that future development in West Marin would have an impact on traffic,
Councilmember Gram said he was in favor of the plan but that there was some work to be done in
the allocation of funds,
MOTION:
Moved:
Vote:
To endorse the Plan as presented,
Thompson, Seconded by Gram
AYES: Unanimous
6) REQUEST FOR ENCROACHMENT PERMIT ALLOWING NEW GARAGE IN
ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY - 2440 Spanish Trail Road, Michael J, Martin, Applicant-
(Execution of Agreement with Applicant).
Planning Director Anderson said the applicant wanted to convert a three-car deck into a two-car
garage and carport. He said Staff recommended denial of the application because the structure
would be an enclosed building within the public right-of-way. Town Engineer Barmand said that
the County of Marin's experience had shown that it was more difficult to remove an enclosed
Town Council Minutes #1136
April 1, 1998
Page 3
structure on a public right-of-way once it was built because it became more or less an extension of
someone's home.
In response to a question from Vice Mayor Bach, Barmand said there had been litigation [at the
County] over trying to take back such an easement, but that the Town could still put utilities in
under the building or around it, rather than widening the street. Barmand said the only way to
avoid litigation was by creating a revocable license [to build the structure].
Councilmember Gram asked if there were other garage encroachments on the street. Planning
Director Anderson said there were car decks and car ports in the right,of,way, but Town
Engineer Barmand said he didn't know of any and the County did not approve such applications,
Town Attorney Danforth said that when the original pennit (for the car deck) was granted, there
was an agreement that she now recommended amending, if Council granted the application.
Councilmember Gram suggested spelling out in clear language that the pennit would be revocable
and what that meant, and that attorney's fees in the case oflitigation be included,
Councilmember Thompson pointed out that the street dead-ended onto the Martha Property,
which could very possibly result in a road,widening project if that property were developed in the
future.
Mayor Matthews opened the public hearing.
Mr. Martin, Applicant, said he wanted the garage for his personal use and enjoyment, and said the
T own Engineer's concerns were not justified in his case. Martin said all the major elements to
construct the structure were already in place, i. e. the deck, support beams and concrete, and that
no more of the right-of-way would be used.
Mr. Martin said that almost everyone on his street encroached onto the public right-of-way for
parking because the houses were built on a downhill slope, He said there would be no heat or
electricity in the garage and that all the garages on the street were detached and separate from the
houses.
Applicant Martin handed out photos of garages at 2304 and 2300 Spanish Trail, and asked why
the County had not denied those applications.
Mr. David Martin, father of the Applicant and his acting attorney, said he had called another legal
expert who said the argument that it would be harder to force removal of an enclosed structure
was not so, He said an agreement was enforceable and that the Town could lien the property and
take it away, if necessary.
Mr. Martin asked that the Council approve the project because 1) it met the requirements of
Chapter 19 of the Town Code, and 2) an agreement would give the Town enforceable rights to
demolish the structure, if necessary,
Town Council Minutes #1136
April 1, 1998
Page 4
Mayor Matthews closed the public hearing & Council deliberated that matter.
Councilmember Hennessy said in all her years as Town Clerk, no garages were permitted to be
built in a public right-of-way,
Councilmember Gram said the structure was already in place and could easily be removed. He
suggested that these kind of applications be considered on a case-by-case basis,
Mayor Matthews said the Tequest seemed reasonable and would fit into the neighborhood.
Vice Mayor Bach said he was concerned about setting a precedent, He stated that even though
he liked the design of the structure, it was a matter of setting policy,
Councilmember Thompson said Staff clearly and strongly opposed the application and he would
support their recommendation.
MOTION:
Moved:
Vote:
To Deny the Application to build a garage at 2440 Spanish Trail Road.
Hennessy, Seconded by Thompson
AYES: Bach, Hennessy, Thompson
NOES: Gram, Matthews
G. PUBLIC HEARING
7) PREZONING OF APPROXIMATELY 30 ACRES OF LAND ALONG THE WESTERN
BOUNDARY OF TIBURON COMPRISED OF THE CYPRESS HOLLOW
SUBDIVISION AND THE RANCHO DRIVE/BARN ROAD AREA, FILE R-98-02:
Assessor Parcel Nos. 34-012-38,40,54,57,61; 34.201-02, 03; 34-202-01 through 12;
34-203,01 through 20; 34-392-02 through 10; 34-393-01 through 11; 34-394-01 through
18; 34-395-01 through 05, (Ordinance - Second Reading & Adoption)
Mayor Matthews opened and closed the public hearing, There was no public comment.
MOTION:
Moved:
Vote:
To read Ordinance by Title only.
Hennessy, Seconded by Thompson
AYES: Unanimous
Mayor Matthews read, "An Ordinance of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon Prezoning
Property Located in the Cypress Hollow Subdivision and the Rancho Drive/Barn Road Area."
MOTION:
Moved:
Vote:
To adopt above Prezoning Ordinance.
Hennessy, Seconded by Bach
AYES: Bach, Gram, Hennessy, Matthews, Thompson
NOES: None
April I, 1998
Page 5
Town Council Minutes #1136
8) PRECISE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT - To relocate building envelope on
undeveloped lot at 94 Via Los Altos by approximately 35 feet to the North; AP#34-330-
27; Lisa and Leonard Gray, Applicants - (Resolution)
Senior Planner Watrous said the application was to shift the building envelope back 37' which
would improve the views of the next door neighbor. He said the Planning Commission had
approved the requested amendment.
Mohamad Sadrieh, architect representing the Grays, said the change was made at the request of
the uphill neighbor and would create more openness and privacy between all three homes in the
area, He also said that when viewed from the street, the change would make the structure less
prominent.
MOTION:
To adopt Resolution approving Precise Development Plan Amendment at 94 Via
Los Altos.
Thompson, Seconded by Hennessy
AYES: Unanimous
Moved:
Vote:
9) PRECISE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT - To expand building envelope for
property located at 31 Gilmartin Drive; AP#55-523-12; Lawrence LanglHuiChi Liu,
Applicants - (Resolution)
Senior Planner Watrous said the application requested an enlargement ofthe structure and
included a Design Review Board revision from a neighbor's request to move the site lines, He
said the Planning Commission had supported the application, subject to DRB approval.
Steven Merch, representing partners Lang and Liu (Yu), said the proposed change would give the
neighbor what they wanted,
MOTION:
To adopt Resolution approving Precise Development Plan Amendment at 31
Gilmartin Drive,
Thompson, Seconded by Hennessy
AYES: Unanimous
Moved:
Vote:
H. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
10) UTILITY UNDERGROUNDING REQUIREMENTS FOR RE-MODEL PROJECTS -
(Consideration of Change to Town Policy with regard to formation of Assessment
Districts).
Town Attorney Danforth said she was responding to a specific Council question regarding
whether future commitment could be obtained from homeowners to form a utility undergrounding
assessment district. She said her research found nothing that says the Town could not do so, but
that Prop. 218 would probably apply, However, Danforth said, Prop, 218 does not include a
provision addressing the issue of contracts.
Town Council Minutes #1136
April 1, 1998
Page 6
Danforth said that if the Council wanted to enable Staff to issue waivers for current Town utility
undergrounding requirements, they could merely adopt Option No, I recommended in the
Building Official's March 4, 1998 Staff Report. [Option 1. "Leave the current policy in place, but
add automatic waivers for neighborhoods where significant undergrounding of overhead power lines is
unlikely to occur and where costs are disproportionate io benefits. Also add language that would clarify
and objectify waiver criteria. '1
Councilmember Thompson said the Council should take a "pro-active" approach, and have the
agreement run with the land. He suggested that a homeowner desiring to make upgrades or
remodel would not have to pay the fees to underground the utilities up front, but promise to join a
assessment district at a later date.
Mayor Matthews foresaw a potential problem in that such a covenant might be unknown to future
owners. Thompson said the Town should do a better job providing notice to home buyers.
Town Attorney Danforth said that whatever contract was signed must include an estimate of costs
for future work,
Council expressed concern that the Town would be "on the hook" for accurate numbers and that
it would take a lot of Staff time to do the estimates. Vice Mayor Bach said it would create
additional bureaucracy,
Councilmember Hennessy said she would support the Building Official's second option. [Option 2,
"Abandon the current policy of attrition except in areas that are likely to be affected by Rule 20A. All
other undergrounding would occur under rule 20B when a neighborhoodforms an assessment district so
that PG&E 's power poles and power lines would disappear at the same time as the service laterals. '1
Councilmember Gram said he was in favor of under grounding utilities, but suggested that if the
cost of the project exceeded 10%, or some reasonable percentage of the remodel project, the
requirement should be waived. He said he would be in favor of estimates ifthere was a simple
way to obtain them.
During public comment, John Kern, Stewart Drive, said undergrounding increased safety and
reliability of power, and eliminated visual pollution. He said it would help to have someone's
name on a petition or agreement to get the district formed,
Staff said they would come back with specific recommendations based on Council's comments,
I. COMMUNICATIONS
11) REDWOOD lllGH SCHOOL 1998 GRAD NIGHT, (Letter from Committee
Chairperson Colleen Williams, dated March 6, 1998)
Item noted,
Town Council Minutes #1136
Aprill,1998
Page 7
12) NEIGHBORHOOD EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM (NERT) ORIENTATION FOR
LOCAL OFFICIALS - (Memo from Belvedere City Manager, dated March 17, 1998).
Council said the proposed date (May 23) was on Memorial Day Weekend and would not work,
13) mSTORIC DISTRICT WORKSHOP DATES - (Memo from Heritage & Arts
Commission, dated March 26, 1998).
Council chose May 14 for the date of the second workshop,
J. STAFF & TOWN MANAGER REPORTS
14) VACANT LAND INVENTORY UPDATE - (planning Director)
Planning Director Anderson said Tiburon Peninsula was 93% built out, plus or minus. He went
over a map of the Peninsula with Council, pointing out the remaining vacant parcels,
K. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Town Council of the Town ofTiburon, MaYOT
Matthews adjourned the meeting at 9:50 p,m., sine die,
HARRY S. MATTHEWS, MAYOR
ATTEST:
DIANE L. CRANE, TOWN CLERK
Town Council Minutes #1136
April 1, 1998
Page 8
TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
Meeting:
To:
May 6, 1998 Item:
TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS
RICHARD STRANZL, FINANCE DIRECTOR
MONTHLY INVESTMENT SUMMARY REPORT _
AS OF THE MONTH ENDED MARCH 31, 1998
CONSENT# 7
From:
Subject:
TOWN OF TIBURON
Institution! Agency
Investment
Amount
Interest Rate
Maturity
State of California Local Agency $4,510,050 5.680% Liquid
Investment Fund
(LAIF)
T ota1Invested: $4,510,050
TIBURON REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
Institution! Agency Investment
Amount
Interest Rate
Maturity
State of California Local Agency $528,106 5,680"10 Liquid
Investment Fund
(LAIF)
Bank of America Certificate of $250,000 5.150% June 29, 1998
Tiburon Branch Deposit (90 days)
I T ota1Invested:
$778,1061
~:
State ofCalifomia Loca1 Agency Investment Fund (LAIF): The interest Tate represents the effective yield for the
month referenced above. The State of California generally distributes investment data reports in the third week
following the month ended. (As received April 27, 1998)
Acknowledgment: This summary report accurately reflects all pooled investments of the Town of Tiburon and
the Tiburon Redevelopment Agency, and is in conformity with State laws and the Investment Policy adopted by
the Town Council. The investment program herein summarized provides sufficient cash flow liquidity to meet
next month's estimated expenditures,
SE~~
April 27, 1998
cc: Town Treasurer
TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
Meeting:
To:
From:
Subject:
May 1, 1998 Item: 8
TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS
RICHARD STRANZL, FINANCE DIRECTOR
PROPOSED 2- YEAR BUDGET PLAN FOR FISCAL YEARS 1999 & 2000 _
SCHEDULE PUBLIC HEARINGS
BACKGROUND
This item is to set dates for public hearings on the proposed Two- Year Municipal Budget Plan for Fiscal
Years ending June 30, 1999 and 2000.
PROPOSED DATES
June 3, 1998
Regular
Introduction
Overview of Preliminary Budget Plan
June II, 1998
Adjourned
Department Operating Budgets
June 17, 1998
Regular
Redevelopment Agency
Capital Improvement Plan
Debt Service
July I, 1998
Regular
Adopt Budget Plans fOT Town and Redevelopment Agency
RECOMMENDATION
Town Council set dates for Public Hearings on the proposed 2, Year Municipal Budget Plan for 1999 & 2000
by: R. Stranzl, Finance Director
1
Mill V'llE'
IIE1(}IE
~o IEIIVICE,
~' IIIC.
DATE: MAY 6, 1998
ITEM: 9
P.O. BOX 3557 - SAN RAFAEL, CALIFORNIA 94912-3557
PHONE: (415) 457-9760 FAX: (415) 457-3003
Mr. Bob Kleinert
Town Manager
Town OfTiburon
1155 Tiburon Blvd.
Tiburon CA 94920
April 10, 1998
Dear Bob,
I am happy to report that MVRS will not be requesting a rate
increase for the 98-99 fiscal year. This as you know is the third
consecutive year that MVRS has not requested an increase for
regular services.
Over the past five years we have worked diligently to cut costs in as
many areas as possible while maintaining a high level of service, We
continue to emphasis and reinforce our preventative maintenance
program, and have recently restructured the program to further
enable our mechanics to prevent or eliminate major equipment
breakdowns.
We have restructured our collection routes that allowed for the
elimination of one Saturday collection route and one full-time route.
We are also performing regular route audits to ensure that customers
are paying for the actual services rendered,
In our Recycling division we have negotiated a new contract for the
processing of materials collected in our recycling operations. This
processing facility has proven to be much more dependable with
maintaining a consistent price per ton. This has allowed MVRS to
absorb increasing operation costs without requesting a rate increase.
We continue to operate within the parameters set in 1995. MVRS
operates at a 90% operating ratio and continues to limit officer
compensation and agreed upon fringe benefits as set forth in 1995.
Currently we are involved in negotiating a new labor contract with
our drivers and the Teamsters union. Which will have an effect on
operating costs, possibly requiring a rate increase in July 1999. We
anticipate this request to be no more than the current CPI level.
I recently met with the Consultants retained by the JPA to review
the diversion programs in Marin County, They will be recommending
that the ]PA use the "annual generation-based analysis". This
method would result in diversion rates of 46.5 1 % to 50% in
Belvedere, Mill Valley and Tiburon,
I am very excited with the changes and the results that have come
from them. We will continue to strive for the best, yet cost effective
service pOSSible for the customers of MVRS. Please feel free to
contact me directly with any questions you may have,
Si~/:? ~
Rick Powell
General Manager
MVRS
STAFF REpORT
Thi
TOWN COUNCIL
ITEM NO. 10
From:
DANIEL M. WATROUS, SENIOR PLANNER
Subject: REQUEST TO DESIGNATE A NEW PRIVATE ROAD AS "mGH
MEADOW LANE"; 94 SUGARLOAF DRIVE
lW.c.L
MAY 6,1998
APPLICANT - DAVID AND JANET TAYLOR
PROJECT DESCRIYI10N:
An easement currently provides access to two parcels along SugarloafDrive. The access point to
this site is situated between 92 and 96 SugarloafDrive. An application has been submitted for a
Precise Development Plan to develop two single family homes on these parcels, As two even-
numbered addresses are not available for the proposed homes, at the request of Town Staff the
property owners have requested that this easement become a private road, to be named "High
Meadow Lane."
ANALYSIS:
This proposal has been reviewed by the local and regional public safety agencies, There are no
other streets with a name similar to "High Meadow Lane" in this portion of Marin County,
although there is a "Meadowhill Drive" offVenado Drive within Yz mile of the subject property.
No objections have been made to this new private road name. The two future homes on this site
would each have a new "High Meadow Lane" address,
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Town Council approve this request and designate this access easement
as "High Meadow Lane," a private road, not maintained by the Town ofTiburon.
EXHmITS:
1. Application form dated March 18, 1998
2, Vicinity maps
TffiURONTOWNCOUNca
"IDGHMEADOW[ANE" STAFFREPORT
MAY 6,1998
LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
TYPE OF APPLICATION
0 Conditional Use Permit 0 Design Review (Majer) 0 Tentati,,~ SubdivisIon Map
0 Precise Development Plan 0 Design Review (Minor l 0 Final Subdivision Map
0 Conceptual Master Plan 0 Variance 0 Parcel Map
0 Rezoning/Prezoning 0 Sign Permit 0 Lot Une Adjustment
0 Zoning Text Amendment 0 Tree Permit 0 Certificate of Compliance
0 General Plan Amendment 0 Underground Waiver !! Other Ass,ign Street Name (pvt
APPLICANT REQUIRED INFORMATION
SITE ADDRESS: ~,~~,,-,r Lo~+ 'iJr,,,,,-, :lf9'i PROPERTY SIZE: <6 CLCY'~<
PARCEL NUMBER: 0 ~ - 100- (~ ZONING:
OWNEROFPROPERTY: .DIrVill t JIrN lOT TAYLoR
MAILiNG ADDRESS: p,o. 2.o~ ~o'10 LHI<>PuR. (4 94qll- ("0'10
CITY IS1'A TE/ZIP:
PHONE NUMBER: '115'1'''-1--<6"..1......... FAX '1/<:: '{<;"( 1-,,"'"
. { '-lIS" 'iliP-l ["1' 0.".1 Wul\<.
APPUCANT: (Other than Propeny Owner)
MAILING ADDRESS:
CITY 1ST A TE/ZII':
PHONE NUMBER: FAX
ARCHITECT/DESIGNER/ENGINEER: f3. D
MAILiNG ADDRESS: 10 0 c: .t~, ,,"uo eI
CITY 1ST A TE/ZIP: S ""'^ r; . "tA" to
PHONE NUMBER: 4\<; (r;,~ ,,0,
~<..f""Ck.",, A/ck,tttt
-tlAv.-l...-
U, '1Ylll
FAX YIS' ((.,y - ,qy'L
Please indicate with an asterisk (*) persons to whom correspondence should be sent,
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT (attach separate sheet if needed):
\' ~ [ (,- \\ /VI. b ~ l) ow L ~)J €:. "
I. the undersigned owner (or authorized agent) of the property herein described, hereby make application for
approval of the plans submitted and made a pan of this application in accordance with the provisions of the Town
Ordinances, and I hereby certify that the information given is true and correct to the best of my knuwledge and
belief.
Signature: ~~k~~
Date: ~II
I
DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS UNE
DEPARTMENTAL PROCESSING INFORMATION
App[ication No.: ::";'RP-,o I Fe. Deposit:
Date Received: q1gA'&" Received By: ;:Jlif'Wtd;; Receipt #
. ,III.!,,_)
f"'.,.. ~ ......_,~ _~ ,.r ,... ,._,_1". _.
$75.00 ./
;;0/0/
,
EXHIBIT NO.
I
((, ...
'-~
...
\......:. .
d
..~
...
1
,
,
PP-dCO::Bi)
U Hl&H. r€A"t;Jcx.J ~E. If
'~
~-
/,~,
\
.-,
~xmBIT NO,
P. 2J:R L
. ;~~~:;....---: --::~ --
....-
:.~~
- ".
,';000' . ~"~
,.;'-- ",.
- .. - -'~.::- :;:--:~.-.
"';"H'_ ".",'
~
)
) co
)
) 8
)
: t.
--
-
,
(J-
.~
I W
~' :.:,'1
p ']
8 -~
15 .;::
<:JL:L
(.l...~
@\
~
,-' - '.-;.. ."
;::: .. ~
.,,-
..
~'
.~ -,
~
~
~.
;r;
r;:o,'" '
\91 ~e~
~ II:
;
..
..
i
'"
, "
1:!'
, ..
... .
:>~
.....
...
~.
~
- ,&, i/l
I rJ,.1
.~~ 0
.. r>-O
\!€.~
..
.,
.....
~ 1<.
,. "
~;:;
~
@
-@
1I.,,~1
1t1, Z"
,,/
TRAHMS
titrE. m IJ / /...
RECEIVED
MAY 1 1998
PLANNING DEPARTMENl
TOWN OF T1BURON
Town of Tiburon Planning Division
1505 Tiburon, Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
Altn: Daniel M. Watrous, Senior Planner
RE: Taylor Family Private Street
Assessor's Parcel Nos. 58-100-54 & 58-281-04
30 April 1998
Dear Mr. Watrous:
On II February 1998 I met with Irwin S. Taylor, M.D., father of David
Taylor, and the Taylor Family's Architect, Mr. Edgar L. McEachron of San
Francisco in our Trahms' Family Home at I Heathcliff Drive, Tiburon. This
Meeting was an Architectual Planning Meeting within which Mr. McEachron
presented his Professional Plot Plan Prints of the above two numbered land
Parcels' development.
These Prints clearly demonstrated the new private street, "High
Meadow Lane", in all aspects. After studying the Prints while viewing the actual
land Parcels from the Trahms' Family Home's kitchen bay window which is
situated directly uphill and in full view of the Parcels; I concluded on behalf of my
entire Family that the proposed private street was acceptable to us. Since Doctor
Taylor more recently assured me that the current planning is essentially the same
as it was on the Prints on 11 February 1998; I was additonally reassured of the
private street's Route and Design.
Furthermore. because I know these Parcels' Topography and Ecology
asa personal hobbyist student of Native Plants, Natural Environmental Plant
Landscape Types and Botanical point-of-view; I can not think ofa more
appropiate name for this new private street than "High Meadow Lane" I I
advise this Name be designated offically by the Tiburon Town Council at it's
Public Meeting on 6 May 1998.
Sincerely,
~~(;, (\
Robert G. Trahms, M.D.
cc David and Janet Taylor
Irwin S. Taylor, M.D.
Edgar L. McEachron, Architect
ITEM NO. J I
Th:. TOWN COUNCIL
From: DANlEL M. WATROUS, SENIOR PLANNER
Subject: CONSIDERATION OF SETILEMENT AGREEMENT REGARDING A
REQUEST TO DMDE ONE PARCEL INTO THREE LOTS
MINOR SUBDIVISION #69602 - 885 B, C & D TIBURON BOULEVARD
~ MAY 6, 1998
APPLICANT - DIXON AND SHARON POWER
BACKGROUND:
The project involves the proposed subdivision of one parcel into three lots for property located at
885 B, C & D Tiburon Boulevard. This property is currently developed with a single-family
dwelling and a duplex, The project would create three separate lots. The single-family dwelling
would be situated on an 11,324 square foot lot (Lot 1). Lot 2, upon which the current duplex is
located, would have an area of 10,245 square feet. The third lot would have an area of20,000
square feet, and could be developed with a single-family dwelling of up to 4,000 square feet in
size in the future. The Tentative Map would establish a specific building envelope in the
northwest comer of Lot 3, with two-story construction limited to the upper comer of the
envelope.
On May 28, 1997, the Planning Commission denied the Minor Subdivision application for this
project. The applicants appealed the Commission's denial to the Town Council On August 14,
1997, the Town Council denied the appeal and upheld the Planning Commission's denial of the
project. The primary bases for denial of the subdivision were the Council's determination that the
subdivision would result in excessive density for the property, in that 4 units would be developed
where there are currently 3, and that access to the site was inadequate for the proposed level of
development. Copies of the Staff report to the Town Council and minutes of the appeal hearing
are attached as Exhibits 4 and 5.
Subsequently, the applicant filed a lawsuit against the Town, seeking to compel the Town to
Town ciTiburw
StaffR'l'ort
5/6198
tcpCM'a'.agr
approve the subdivision. The Legal Subcommittee of the Town Council has been in negotiations
with the applicant, and has reached a tentative agreement to settle the lawsuit. The provisions of
the settlement agreement would be as follows:
Planning Provisions:
1. The existing duplex shall be permanently converted into a single-family dwelling
unit. The Powers shall make such modifications deemed necessary by the Town
Building Official to accomplish the conversion, These modifications shall include,
at a minimum, removal of one kitchen and provision of an interior access
connection between the floors of the building.
2. A building permit for future construction on the proposed Lot 3 will not be issued
by the Town until the duplex has been converted into a single-family dwelling unit
to the satisfaction of the Town Building Official
3, Vehicular access to the proposed Lot 3 will be permitted via Las Palmas Way only
wtil the adjacent 5.6 acre parcel at the end of Stony Hill Road is developed, At
that time, access to this lot shall be provided only from the connection to Stony
Hill Road, and use of the Las Palmas Way access for this lot shall cease.
4. Improvements shall be made to increase the turning radii at the comers of the
driveway on the Power property providing access from Las Palmas Way to allow
fire apparatus to make these turns. Such improvements shall be subject to the
review and approval of the Tiburon Fire Protection District and the Town
Engineer,
5. The carport for the existing duplex shall be converted into an enclosed garage or
shall be demolished and replaced with a two-car garage,
6, The chimney on the existing duplex shall be lowered to the satisfaction of the
Town Planning Director.
7. The applicant shall comply with all of the mitigation measures contained within the
Mitigated Negative Declaration adopted for this project.
L~al Provisions:
1. The Powers shall agree to dismiss the subject litigation with prejudice, In addition,
the agreement shall include a release and waiver of all claims and actions relating
to the subdivision application, except for the ability to enforce the settlement
agreement.
2, Any construction upon the Power property shall require design review approval
TO\W. ofTiburm
Staff R<port
5/6/98
tqJower.agr
2
and all other permits and approvals mandated by state law and the Municipal
Code.
3, The Powers shall agree to indemnifY, defend and hold the Town harmless from any
claims, or actions arising from the settlement agreement. This obligation shall
include, without limitation, the payment of any awards of costs and/or attorneys
fees against the Town as a resuh of defending the settlement agreement. In
addition, without limiting the forgoing, in the event that the agreement is
challenged by litigation, the Town shall have the option of tendering the defense of
such action to the Powers,
4. The violation of any of the conditions imposed on the subdivision pursuant to the
settlement agreement shall be deemed a public nuisance. Without limiting any
other remedies available by law, the Town shall have the right to seek immediate
abatement of such violation and the Powers hereby waive the right to contest such
abatement.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
An initial study/draft mitigated negative declaration was prepared for this project and released for
public comment on February 14, 1997, The initial study/draft mitigated negative declaration is
attached as Exhibit 2. The public review period ended on March 12, 1997. This negative
declaration was never adopted, as the project itself was denied by the Town. In order to approve
the subdivision at this time, the Town Council would need to adopt the attached resolution
(Exlu"bit I) adopting the negative declaration for the project.
The initial study identified the potential for significant environmental impacts in the following
categories:
Geologic Hazards
Air Quality
Water Quality
Noise
Emergency Evacuation Plan
Aesthetics
Mitigation measures and a draft mitigation monitoting program (Exhibit 3) have been developed
which would reduce the potential for adverse environmental impacts to less-than-significant
levels. The areas of most substantial concem related to potential geotechnical and drainage
impacts as descn"bed below.
Tov.n ofTiburc:n
StaffR'I'ort
516198
tcpower.agr
3
Geotechnical concerns
The slope and other physical conditions of Lot 3 create potential geotechnical and drainage
concerns for the development of this proposed parcel A geotechnical investigation of the site
was performed by a consultant hired by the applicant (ExIu'bit C of the attached Draft Negative
Declaration), This investigation encountered evidence of landslide deposits, but made detailed
recommendations for improvements to be completed as part of any future construction on this
property. These recommendations included deeper and well-reinforced drilled pier and grade
beam foundations to a minimum depth of20 feet, engineered retaining walls for all permanent cut
slopes, a deep trench subdrain system, and minimi"ed site grading, cutting and filling.
Drainaie concerns
A drainage study was also prepared for this project (Exhibit D of the Draft Negative Declaration).
The projected runoff from the watershed on which site is located would increase by 2.1 % after
construction of a single- family dwelling on Lot 3. In the case of a 100 year storm, the projected
water flow from this entire watershed could still be handled by the existing concrete box culvert
crossing Tiburon Boulevard below the site. A series of catch basins and storm drain pipes are
planned to be installed along the proposed driveway to the northeast comer of Lot 3. A new
drainage easement is also proposed along the southem property line, eventually emptying water
from the site into the natural winter season creek located on the adjacent parcel to the southeast.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The Town council should hold a public hearing on this matter. If the Town Council concludes
that the tentative settlement agreement is satisfactory, the appropriate actions would be to:
I. Adopt the attached resolution adopting the Negative Declaration for this project;
and
2, Direct Staff to return with a resolution approving the settlement agreement and
approving the Minor Subdivision.
If the Town Council finds the tentative settlement unsatisfactory, then direction should be
provided for further negotiations or for abandonment of the settlement process,
EXHTRITS:
I. Draft Resolution
2, Draft Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration
3. Draft Mitigation Monitoring Plan
4, Town Council Staff report dated August 6, 1997
5, Minutes of the August 6, 1997 Town Council meeting
C:IREPORTS\TCPOWER,AGR
TO\ND. ofTiburCl1
Staff Rq>crt
5/6/98
tq)(JwtT.agr
4
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND
MUTUAL GENERAL R,ELEASE
This Settlement Agreement and Mutual General Release ("Agreement") is entered into
as of , 1998 between the Town of Tiburon ("Town"), a municipal
corporation, and Dixon Power and Sharon Power ("Powers").
RECITALS
1. The Powers are the owners of a .95-acre parcel located at 885B, C and D Tiburon
Boulevard in the Town of Tiburon ("Property"), more particularly described in Exhibit A, which is
attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The Property is in the R-l zoning district,
which allows a maximum of one unit per parcel. There are presently three units on the Property,
consisting of a single family home ("Existing House") and a duplex ("Existing Duplex"), These
improvements are legal non-conforming uses.
On August 8, 1996, the Powers submitted to the Town an application for a tentative
subdivision map to resubdivide the Property into three parcels ("Subdivision Application"). Under
the terms of the Subdivision Application, the Existing House would be situated on all, 324 square-
foot parcel. The Existing Duplex would be situated on an 11,324 square-foot parcel and would be
maintained as a duplex, The remaining portion of the Property would constitute a third parcel of
approximately 20,000 square feet, which could be developed with a single-family dwelling unit.
3. The Town's Planning Commission held duly noticed public hearings on the
Subdivision Application on April 9, 1997 and May 14, 1997, At the conclusion of the May 14, 1997
hearing, the Planning Commission determined that it could not grant the Subdivision Application
under the Town's General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance. The Planning Commission adopted a
resolution memorializing its findings and decision on May 28, 1997.
4. The Powers filed a timely appeal of the Commission's decision. The Town Council
held a public hearing on this appeal on August 6, 1997, At the conclusion of this hearing, the Council
decided to reject the appeal and uphold the decision of the Planning Commission.
5. On November 4, 1997, the Powers filed a petition for writ of mandamus and complaint
for declaration, relief and damages in Marin County Superior Court ("Petition"), Pawer v, The Tawn
ofTiburon, et al. Case No. 172314, (Marin Superior Court).
6. In the interest of avoiding unnecessary litigation, the parties desire to settle the
aforementioned litigation on the terms set forth in this agreement. On May 6, 1998, the Town
Council held a public hearing on the proposed settlement and, after considering all public testimony
and all evidence in the record, authorized the Mayor to execute this agreement.
1
AGREEMENT
The Town and the Powers, in consideration of the mutual covenants of the
Agreement, hereby agree to the following terms and conditions:
1. The Town hereby approves the subdivision of the Property described in that
tentative map dated ("Approved Tentative Map"), a copy of which is on file with the Town
Planning Department and which is incorporated herein by reference, subject to the following
conditions:
A. The Existing Duplex shall be permanently converted into a single-family
dwelling unit. Prior to recordation of the parcel map for the subdivision approved herein, the Powers
shall make such physical modifications deemed necessary by the Town Building Official to accomplish
this conversion, These modifications shall include, at a minimum, removal of one kitchen and
provision of an interior access connection between the floors of the building,
B, Prior to recordation of the parcel map for the subdivision approved
herein, the Powers shall convert the carport fOT the Existing Duplex into an enclosed garage or shall
demolish and Teplace the carport with a two-car garage,
C. Prior to Tecordation of the parcel map for the subdivision approved
herein, the Powers shall lower the chimney on the existing duplex to the satisfaction of the Town
Planning Director.
D. Vehicular access to the proposed Lot 3 will be permitted via
Las Palmas Way only until the adjacent 5.6 acre parcel at the end of Stony Hill Road is developed.
At that time, Powers shall make any improvements necessary to provide access to Lot 3 from Stony
Hill Road, which theTeafter shall be the only access to Lot 3, The Power~ will remove the driveway
providing access to Lot 3 from Las Palmas Way as soon as reasonably possible after access can be
obtained from Stony Hill Road. In the event that the Powers no longer own Lot 3 at the time that
performance of this condition is due, the then,owners of Lot 3 shall be responsible for performing this
condition, This condition shall be noted on the parcel map,
E. The Powers shall improve the comers of the driveway on the Power
property providing access from Las Palmas Way to increase the turning radii to allow fire apparatus
to make these turns. Such improvements shall be subject to the review and approval of the Tiburon
Fire Protection District and the Town Engineer and shall be completed prior to issuance of a
certificate of occupancy for the proposed Lot 3.
F. The building envelope for Lot 3 shall be that set forth in the Approved
Tentative Map, The two-story portion of the structure that the Town may approve fOT Lot 3
pursuant to the Approved Tentative Map shall be a minimum of 150 feet from the closest point of the
2
single family dwelling at 1 Owlswood Road, Tiburon, CA. The maximum height for the one-story
portion of the building on Lot 3 shall be 18 feet. The maximum height of any garage on Lot 3 shall
be 15 feet from finished grade.
G. The Powers shall comply with the mitigation measures included in the
Negative Declaration adopted by the Town for this project. In addition, any improvements on any
portion of the Property shall be subject to the requirements ofthe Town's Municipal Code, including,
without limitation, architectural and site plan review,
H. This Agreement shall run with the land and be binding on the Powers'
successors in interest to the Property, Violation of any conditions set forth in this Agreement shall
be considered a public nuisance subject to immediate abatement and the Powers hereby waive any
right to contest such abatement.
2, The Powers accept the approval set forth in this Agreement in full settlement
and compromise of their litigation against the Town, The Powers furtheT agree that this Agreement
shall fully and forever discharge and release any and all claims and causes of action, whether now
known or now unknown, which the Powers have against the Town arising out of the events or
incidents referred to in the Petition including any claims for attorneys' fees and costs,
3. This Agreement includes an express waiver of Civil Code section 1542, which
states: "A general release does not extend to claims which the creditor does not know or suspect to
exist in his favor at the time of executing the release, which if known by him must have materially
affected his settlement with the debtor."
4. The Town and the Powers shall execute and file a Stipulation for Judgment
incorporating this Agreement and agree to an entry of Judgment ordering the Powers to dismiss all
causes of action in the proceeding with prejudice according to the terms of this Agreement.
Judgment may be entered by the Court upon submission of the documents by the Powers. Said
documents shall be submitted to the Court by the Powers on or before . 1998.
The Town shall thereafter file a copy of this Agreement and the Judgment with the County Recorder.
5. The Powers shall defend, indemniiY, and hold the Town harmless from and
against any and all liens, and other challenges that may be asserted by any person against or arising
out ofthis Agreement. This obligation shall include, without limitation, the payment of any awards
of costs or attorneys fees against the Town as a result of defending this Agreement, In addition,
without limiting the forgoing, in the event that the agreement is challenged by litigation, the Town
shall have the option of tendering the defense of such action to the Powers.
6. It is understood and agreed that this is a compromise settlement agreement of
disputed claims, and that the execution of this Agreement shall not constitute or be deemed or
construed as an admission ofliability on the part of any of the parties.
3
7. The parties acknowledge that they have been represented in the preparation
of this Agreement by the below-listed counsel. The parties further acknowledge that they have read
this Agreement and that they are fully aware of its intent and its legal effect and they have not been
influenced to any extent whatever by any representations made to them by each other, The parties
further represent that they participated in the negotiation of this Agreement and that it will not be
interpreted against any of them as the draftsperson in the event of a dispute about this Agreement.
8, This Agreement represents the sole and entire agreement between the parties
hereto and supersedes all prior agTeements, negotiations and discussions among them with respect
to the subject matter covered hereby, Any amendment to this Agreement must be in writing and
signed by the authorized representatives of the parties hereto.
9. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which when so
executed shall be deemed an original, and this Agreement and all signed counterparts shall constitute
one and the same instrument,
10. This Agreement is deemed executed on the date first written above.
II. Any provisions of Evidence Code section 1152,5 notwithstanding, this
Agreement may be enforced by any party hereto by a motion under Code of Civil Procedure section
664,6 or by any other procedure permitted by law in the Superior Court of Marin County.
12, This Agreement, consisting of_pages, shall be construed and enforced in
accordance with law of the State of California.
SHARON POWER
THE TOWN OF TIBURON
By:
Robert L. Kleinert
Town Manager, Town ofTiburon
IKON POWER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
David Bowie, Esq,
Attorney for Sharon and Dixon Power
Ann R. Danforth, Esq.
Town Attorney, Town of Tiburon
POWER.LIT
4
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL
APPROVING THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
FOR A TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP APPLICATION (FILE NO. 69602)
(885 B, C & D TIBURON BOULEVARD)
ASSESSOR PARCEL NO 55-26]-11
WHEREAS, the Tiburon Town Council does resolve as follows:
Section 1. Findings.
A The Town ofTiburon has received an application for a Tentative Map to subdivide a 0,95
acre property into 3 lots at 885 B, C & D Tiburon Boulevard, Said application consists of
File No, 69602,
B. An initial study had been prepared for this project, This initial study was circulated for
review from February 14, ]997 to March 12, 1997, in conformance with the requirements
of the California Environmenta] Quality Act.
C. The Planning Commission held duly-noticed public hearings on April 9, 1997, and May
]4, 1997, and heard and considered testimony from interested persons, On May 28, 1997,
the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No 97-11 denying this project. The
Mitigated Negative Declaration was not acted upon at that time,
D. The applicant subsequently appealed the Planning Commission's decision to the Town
Council. On August 6, 1997, the Town Council held a duly-noticed public hearing and
heard and considered testimony from interested persons, On August 14, 1997, the Town
Council adopted Resolution No. 3239 denying the appeal and upholding the Planning
Commission's denial of the project. The Mitigated Negative Declaration was not acted
upon at that time.
E. The applicants subsequently filed a lawsuit against the Town attempting to compel the
Town to approve the project. The Town and applicant have engaged in settlement talks
for the purpose of resolving the litigation through a settlement agreement allowing a
conditioned approval of the Tentative Subdivision Map.
F. The Town Council held a duly-noticed public hearing on May 6, 1998 to consider the
settlement agreement and adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project,
and heard and considered testimony from interested persons.
G. This initial study found potential impacts to geologic hazards, air quality, water quality,
noise, emergency services and aesthetics. A geotechnical investigation of the site
Tiburon Town Council
Resolution No.
May 6, 1996
EY,lEBIT NO..l-
f. l DPL
encountered evidence of landslide deposits, but made detailed recommendations for
improvements to be completed as part of any future construction on this property. A
drainage study prepared for this project projected that runoff from the watershed on which
site is located would increase by 2,1 % after construction of a single-family dwelling on
the proposed Lot 3. In the case ofa 100 year storm, the projected water flow from this
entire watershed could still be handled by the existing concrete box culvert crossing
Tiburon Boulevard below the site, along with other improvements proposed for the
project, Mitigation measures and a draft mitigation monitoring program have been
developed which would reduce the potential for these and all other adverse environmental
impacts to less-than-significant levels,
Section 2 AdQption,
NOW, TIIEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Tiburon Town Council does hereby
adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project, and directs that a Notice of Determination
be filed with the County Clerk within five (5) working days of final project approval
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tiburon Town Council on May 6,
1998 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
HARRY S. MATTIIEWS, MAYOR
TOWN OF TIBURON
ATTEST:
DIANE CRANE, TOWN CLERK
Tiburon Town Council
Resolution No.
May 6,1996
2
EXHIBIT NO, I
y. 2- 6F2..-
.I
I
Town of Tiburon
Environmental Checklist Form
(Appendix G)
(To be completed by Staff as part of the Initial Study)
Date:
Staff Member:
February 14, 1997
Daniel M. Watrous, Senior Planner
A. Project Information
L Application Number(s): Minor Subdivision #69602
2. Location: 885 B, C & D Tiburon Boulevard
3, Parcel No(s): 55-261,11
4. Project Sponsor: Dixon and Sharon Power
5. Specific Project Description: Request to subdivide one (1) parcel into three (3)
lots. The existing parcel is developed with a single-
fiuniIy home and a duplex. The proposed subdivision
would result in the house being situated on one lot,
the duplex on a second lot and a third vacant lot.
The third lot could be developed with a single-family
home, connected by a 540 foot long extended
driveway leading to a public street. This would
involve the grading and pavement of a driveway
across currently vacant, gently sloping land. To
shore up the slopes adjacent to the driveway, several
retaining walls will be constructed, including a 60
foot long, 2 foot high wall along the side of the
driveway, and two smaller curved retaining walls
where the driveway turns toward the garage.
Additional grading will be required for the
construction of the house proposed to be
constructed on the proposed third lot. Drainage
improvements will include the installation of
pipelines and a series of catch basins within the
TOWN OF TffiURON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW GUIDELINES ,INITIAL S111DY CHECKLIST 1/97
1
EXHIBIT NO.-L
\>-. l. tl~ \ \ '1
extended driveway and a portion of the third lot,
exiting across a proposed drainage easement on an
adjacent parcel.
6.
General Plan Designation:
MIl (Medium High Density Residential-up to 4.4
du/ ac, )
7.
Zoning District:
R-l
8.
Surrounding land uses
and setting:
North: Vacant hillside
East: Single- family residential
South: Single-family residential
West: Vacant hillside
9.
Other Public Agencies
whose approval is required:
None
B. Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
. A brief explanation is required for all answers,
. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off,site as weU as on.site,
cwnulative as weU as project level, indirect as weU as direct, and construction as weU as operational
impacts.
. "Potentially Significant hnpact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is
significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant hnpact" entries when the detennination
is made, an EIR is required,
. "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation
measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant hnpact" to a "Less than Significant
hnpact". Describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than
significant level.
Poten1iall.y
Sign:i.ficant
Imp""
Potalti.ny
SigDific;:at
Unlll" LessThaa
Milisa.tioll SigDificanl
Iacorpunted ImplCt
N.
Imp"",
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
a, Unstable earth conditions or in changes in
geologic substructures?
Explanation:
xx
The proposed project will require only minimal grading to accomplish. No unstable earth conditions
TOWN OF TIDURON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW GUIDELINES -IN\TW. STUDY ClIECKUST 1/97
2
EXHIBIT NO. -z...
?, 2- OP i 1'1
or changes in geologic substructures will result (Source: Diagram S-2, Safety Element of the
Tiburon General Plan, 1989).
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction,
or over covering ofthe soil?
Explanation:
xx
The proposed project will result in the paving of an extended driveway to provide access to the
northernmost of the three new lots. The 540 foot long driveway will be 13 feet wide, with two 4
fOot wide car tumouts (one 50 feet in length, the other 45 feet long) widening the driveway area to
17 feet at these points. Although the driveway will disturb some existing vegetation, Staff does not
consider covering of the soil to be a significant issue,
c. Change in topography or ground surface
relief features?
Explanation:
xx
The extended driveway and other proposed improvements will not significantly alter the topography
of the site or adjoining properties. An existing fire road occupies the alignment of the proposed
driveway.
d. The destruction, covering, or
modification or any unique geologic
or physical features?
Explanation:
xx
An inspection of the project site did not reveal any unique physical features. There are no unique
geologic features on or near the site (Source: Safety Element of the Tiburon General Plan),-
e. Any increase in wind or water erosion
of soils, either on or off the site?
Explanation:
xx
The proposed project has the potential to increase wind and water erosion of exposed soils during
construction, but after construction the proposed paving of the extended driveway should seIVe to
reduce wind and water erosion. Standard construction practices including regular watering of
uncovered soils will keep temporary construction impacts at less-than-significant levels.
TOWN OF TffiURON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW GUIDELINES -INITIAL STUDY CllECKUST 1<')7
3
EXHIBIT NO. "2...-
p, ~ b~llq
Potealially
-,
Imp"
Pore.1iaI1y
Sipific;:llllt
...... Lou_
Mi.non ~cur N.
moorpOtated ImpMlt Impu
f. Changes in deposition or erosion of
beach sands, or changes in siltation,
deposition, or erosion which may
modify the channel of a river or
stream or the bed of the ocean
or any bay, inlet, or lake?
Explanation:
xx
The drainage study prepared for this proposed project estimated that there would be an increase in
discharge due to the proposed development of 2. 1 % for the entire watershed around the site, The
civil engineer who prepared this study characterized this increase as "negligible," This marginal
increase in water runoff therefore will not affect any surface body of water (Source: Drainage study
prepared by Bracken & Keane, October, 1996).
g. Exposure of people or property to
geologic hazards such as earthquakes,
landslides, mudslides, ground
failure, or similar hazards?
Explanation:
xx
The proposed project is situated upon land identified by the Safety Element of the Tiburon General
Plan as containing landslide or debris flow deposits. Since the slope on this property is less than 30
percent, construction can occur if the structural integrity (e.g., pilings) for any proposed buildings
reaches beyond the depth of the deposit. A geotechnical report was prepared for this project which
analyzed the soils and seismic conditions on the site. This investigation did not encounter evidence
of landslide deposits, but made recommendations for structural supports and retaining walls to avoid
potential problems. The report also concluded that there is the possibility of strong earthquake
vibrations on the site during the useful life of the development, but that the proposed house and
driveway could be designed to withstand these forces (Source: Geotechnical Investigation
conducted by Earth Science Consultants, April, 1996),
Recommended Miti~ation Measures
The following conditions should be applied to the Conditional Use Permit:
l.g,l. Pilings or other reinforcements to the structural integrity of the proposed house shall
be constructed beyond the depth of the underlying landslide or debris flow deposits
TOWN OF TffiURON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW GUIDELINES ,INITIAL sruny CHECKLIST 1197
4
EXHIBIT NO. 1-
~. 4 0tc Wi
Pote:alillly
Si&nifiOlllt
1m,..
Potala.ily
SipiliOlllt
UnIOll LeulUa
Mi.atioa SigDifiCIIII.1
IlIcorpof8led Impeet
N.
1m,..
in conformance with the recommendations of the geotechnical investigation
prepared by Earth Science Consultants.
Lg.2. All structural, architectural and mechanical details of proposed construction shall be
designed to resist earthquake groundshaking, as recommended by the prepared
geotechnical investigation,
2. Air, Will the proposal result in:
a. Substantial air emissions or
deterioration of ambient air quality?
Explanation:
xx
Short-term fugitive dust impacts could occur during construction on the site due to earth-moving
and other construction activities.
Recommended Mitigation Measures:
The following condition should be applied to the Conditional use Permit:
2.a. L The site shall be watered during construction to reduce the impacts of such dust to
acceptable levels,
b. The creation of objectionable odors?
Explanation:
xx
The proposed paving of the extended driveway will generate short term impacts from asphalt odors,
but Staff considers this temporary impact to be less-than-significant.
c, Alteration of air movement, moisture,
or temperature, or any change in
climate, either locally or regionally?
Explanation:
xx
The proposed project will not have any effect on the climate of the surrounding area.
3, Water. Will the proposal result in:
TOWN OF TlBURON ENVIRONMENrAL REVIEW GUIDELINES ,INITIAL SI11DY CHECKLIST 1/97 5
EK..B:IJ?IT NO. "2-
-R. 5 tf= \ \.'1
Poteuli8Dy
Significant
1m,""
Potentially
Signi6cant
lTJdeu Les.l1uar.
Mili&IIiOD SigDifiCllllI
Iaeorporatcd ImpBCI
N.
1m,""
a. Changes in currents, or the course
of direction of water movements, in
either marine or fresh waters, or wetlands?
Explanation:
xx
The Drainage study prepared for the proposed project estimated an increase in runoff during a 25-
year storm in the watershed SlUTOunding the site of 2.1 % as a result of the proposed development.
This increase will be insufficient to change the currents, or the course of directions of water
movements, in either marine or fresh waters, or wetlands (Source: Drainage study prepared by
Bracken & Keane, October, 1996 [Revised January, 1997]).
b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage
patterns, or the rate and amount of
surface runoff?
Explanation:
xx
The proposed project will affect absorption rates and increase the amount of surface runoff for the
paved area of the extended driveway and any future building sites. A series of catch basins, ditches
and pipes will direct the drainage off the site via several newly established drainage easements to
a rock rip rap area for percolation. Staff does not consider the change in the amount of runoff to
be an significant environmental impact in this instance because of the small area involved.
c. Alterations to the course or flow of
flood waters?
Explanation:
xx
The proposed project will not affect the course or flow of floodwaters,
d. Change in the amount of surface
water in any water body or wetland?
Explanation:
xx
The drainage study prepared for the proposed project estimated an increase in runoff during a 25-
year storm for the watershed SlUTounding the site of2.1 % as a result of this development. The civil
engineer who prepared the report described this increase as "negligible." This minor increase in
TOWN OF TIllURON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW GUIDELINES ,INITIAL STUDY CHECKUST \/97
6
EXHIBIT NO. -z..
f~ fa tf! W=I
Po_liIIly
Sipi.601llt
1m""
Potenially
--
0lIl_ r-n.
MilipliOll SipiliOlllt
IDccnponted Impact
No
1m""
runoff would not be large enough to have a significant effect on the amount of surface water in the
water bodies into which this runoffwill drain (Source: Drainage study prepared by Bracken &
Keane, October, 1996 [Revised January, 1997]).
e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any
alteration of surface water quality, including
but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen,
turbidity, or other typical storm water pollutants
(e.g. sediment from construction, hydrocarbons
and metals from vehicle use, nutrients and
pesticides from landscape maintenance)? XX
Explanation:
The drainage study prepared for the proposed project indicated that this development would result
in a "negligible" increase in stormwater runoff Runoff from the site does have the potential for
carrying pollutants into the nearby bay (Source: Drainage study prepared by Bracken & Keane,
October, 1996 [Revised January, 1997]).
Recommended Mitigation Measures:
The following condition should be applied to the Conditional use Permit:
3.e.I. Project design and construction activities will utilize Best Management Practices as
descnbed in the California Storm Water Best Management Practice Handbook for
Construction Activity, March, 1993
f. Alteration of the direction or rate
of flow of groundwaters?
Explanation:
XX
No activities are proposed which would have an impact on groundwaters.
g. Cbange in the quantity of groundwaters,
either through direct additions or
withdrawals, or through interception
of an aquifer by cuts or
TOWN OF TIDURON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW GUIDELINES ,INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIlIT 1/97
7
EXJHBIT NO. <-
? 7 Of! t~~
Poten1ially
SigDiJiClllt
Imp""
Potentially
SipifiClllt
Unless LeuThIlR
Mi~"oa SiAaifiClllt
I:a~ ImpM
N.
hop""
excavations?
Explanation:
xx
No activities are proposed which would have an impact on groundwaters,
h. Change in the quality of gronndwaters
through infIltration of reclaimed water or
stormwater runoff that has contacted
pollutants from urban, industrial,
or agricultural activities?
Explanation:
xx
No activities are proposed which would have an impact on groundwaters.
i. Alteration of wetlands in any way?
Explanation:
xx
No activities are proposed which would have an impact on wetlands. A biological reconnaissance
of the site revealed a small (30' by 10') area of potential wetlands which contained several plant
species which occur in either wetlands or uplands areas. As the study found no evidence of wetland
hydrology conditions or soil characteristics, this area is not likely to be considered as a wetlands
area (Source: Biological study prepared by LSA Associates, October, 1996).
j. Substantial reduction in the amount
of water otherwise available for
public water supplies?
Explanation:
xx
The possible future addition of a single-family house would not result in a significant impact on
public water supplies.
k. Exposure of people or property to
water-related hazards such as
flooding or tidal waves?
Explanation:
xx
TOWN OF TIBURON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW GUIDELINES ,INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIS\' 1/97
8
EXHIBIT NO. ""2-
P.- g- bY LL't
PotenUlly
SipifiQIDt
Im_
Potelltially
Sipifi~t
UaJeu LeuThaa
MilipliOll Sigaificat
IDcorpctnIed ImJMCl
N.
Im_
The proposed project will not expose people or property to water-related hazards.
4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species,
or number of any species of plants
(including trees, shrubs, grass,
crops, and aquatic plants)?
Explanation:
xx
The proposed project will not affect the diversity of plants. The construction of the proposed
extended driveway would involve the removal of some hillside vegetation, but would not
significantly reduce the amount of any particular plant species, The biological study prepared for
this project indicated that most of the plant species found on the site were non-native in nature, and
were abundant throughout the Tiburon Peninsula (Source: Biological study prepared by LSA
Associates, October 1996).
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique,
rare, or endangered species of plants?
Explanation:
xx
Investigation conducted as part of the biological study prepared for this project concluded that
special-status plant species are not expected to occur on the property (Source: Biological study
prepared by LSA Associates, October, 1996). '
c. Introduction of new species of plants
into an area, or in a barrier to the
normal replenishment of existing
species?
Explanation:
xx
The proposed project will not introduce new plant species or present any barriers to the
replenishment of existing species.
TOWN OF TIBURON ENVIRONMEIITAL REVIEW GUIDELINES -INITIAL sruny CHECKLIST 1/97
9
E1CrIIBIT NO. 2-
? 't OF tl'1
PotenUDy
SigniJieant
Imp,""
PotesltiBly
Signifieant
Uulesa Lel.slbn
Miqatiea. Sipifieant
InQltlJloraled bnpU
N.
1m....
d. Reduction in acreage of any
agricultural crop?
Exp lanation:
xx
The proposed project will not reduce the production of any agricultural crop.
e. Reduction in acreage of wetlands?
Explanation:
xx
There are no wetlands on the site, although a potential wetlands area was identified by the biological
study prepared for this project, but dismissed an actual wetlands site. The drainage study prepared
for the proposed project indicated that the increase in storm water runoff as a result of this
development would be "negligible," with no projected impacts on any surrounding wetlands areas
(Sources: Biological study prepared by LSA Associates, October, 1996, and drainage study
prepared by Bracken & Keane, October, 1996 [Revised January, 1997]),
5, Animal Life, Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species,
or numbers of any species of animals
(birds, land animals including
reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic
organisms or insects)?
Explanation:
xx
The improvements associated with the proposed project will only remove a minimal amount of non-
native vegetation identified by the biological study prepared for this project. Staff feels that this
minimal impact on potential wildlife habitat will not have any significant effects on animal life
(Source: Biological study prepared by LSA Associates, October, 1996).
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique,
rare, or endangered species of animals?
Explanation:
xx
The biological study prepared for this project found no evidence of any species of unique, rare or
endangered animal. on the site, and determined that the physical conditions of the property would
TOWN OF TffiURON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW GUIDELINES ,INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST 1/97 10
EXHIBIT NO. 2-
-
i>. LO"OF t l't
PotelllWly
Sipti.&ClIII.t
Imp"
Potelllially
SigBifi'*lt
UnleN LessThu
MilisuOll SipiJic;at
lllcorporated Impact
N.
Imp"
not support any such species that occur elsewhere on the Tiburon Peninsula (Source: Biological
study prepared by LSA Associates, October, 1996),
c. Introduction of new species of
animals into an area, or result in
a barrier to the migration or
movement of animals?
Explanation:
xx
The proposed project will not introduce any new species of animals into the area. The
improvements associated with this project will not result in any barriers to the migration or
movement of animals.
d, Deterioration to existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
Explanation:
xx
The improvements associated with the proposed project will only remove a minimal amount of
vegetation. Staff feels that this minimal impact on potential wildlife habitat will not have any
significant effects on animal life,
6. Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
Explanation:
xx
The proposed project will result in a short-term increase in noise from grading and earth-moving
equipment and other normal residential construction activities, Construction which occurs during
most daylight hours is not likely to increase ambient noise to significant levels for surrounding
residences.
Recommended Mitigation Measures'
The following condition should be applied to the Conditional Use Permit:
6.a,1. All construction activity shall comply with the Town's limitations on construction
hours to prevent noise impacts during nighttime,
TOWN OF TIBURON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW GUIDELINES ,INITIAL my CHECKLIST 1/97
11
EXHIBIT NO. '2-
, ~
-P. II OF ncr
_. ._- ---_." .__.~..----~._-----------~-- _._-_.--,
Poten1ially
SiAaifieant
Poteallillly Unlest Leun-
SigoifiCllRt Mitigalioa SipifiOlll' No
Impact IDcorporated ImpllCt Impact
b. Exposure of people to severe noise
levels?
Explanation:
xx
The proposed project will not expose persons to severe noise levels.
7.
Light and Glare. Will the proposal
produce new light or glare?
Explanation:
xx
The proposed project will not produce any new light or glare.
8.
Land Use. Will the proposal result in a
substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of the area?
Explanation:
xx
The area around the project site is developed primarily with detached single-family homes.
Detached homes are currently situated to the south and east of the subject property. The duplex
on one of the three proposed parcels is the only attached home in the vicinity. Other vacant parcels
surrounding the site are zoned for development with single-family detached houses. The proposed
project, therefore, which includes the construction of one additional single-family home, will not
alter the present and planned single,family residential nature of the area:
9.
Natural Resources. Will the proposal
result in an increase in the rate of
use of any natural resources?
xx
Explanation:
The proposed project will not affect the rate of use of any natural resource,
10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve:
TOWN OF TffiURON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW GUIDELINES ,INITIAL STUDY CIIECKUsr 1/97 12
w;TT-HPT'I'i\I\TO "2...-
L.i....~~__~~... ' "l .
P,' 12- Dt=: ~ [,<1
pote:alially
Sislli6Cl11lt
fm.....
Poten....y
Sigaifieant
Unl_ LeuTh...
Mitiplio. Significaat
I:ncorpo1'8ted Impacl'
N.
fmp""
a.
A risk of an explosion or the release of
hazardous substances (including, but not
limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals,
or radiation) in the event of an accident
or upset conditions?
xx
Explanation:
The proposed project does not include the use or storage of hazardous materials,
b. Possible interference with an
emergency response plan or an
emergency evacuation plan?
Explanation:
xx
The Tiburon Fire Protection District has indicated that the design of the proposed project could
hamper the ability to fight any fires on the proposed third lot any future home (Source: Letter from
Tiburon Fire Protection District, December 14, 1996).
Recommended Mitigation Measures:
The following conditions should be applied to the Conditional use Permit:
10.b.!.
Access roads to each new lot shall be not less than 12 feet unobstructed
width with a maximum 18% grade; they shall be constructed with an all-
weather driving surface, capable of supporting the imposed loads of fire
apparatus and having a minimum of 13 feet, 6 inches of vertical clearance.
10.b.2,
Access roads in excess of 150 feet shall be provided with an approved
turnaround,
IO.b.3,
Any gates shall be equipped with emergency fire access for fire apparatus,
10,b.4.
An approved water supply, including water main and new hydrant, shall be
installed at the base of the driveway serving the lot accessed from Stony Hill
Road.
TOWN OF TffiURON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW GUIDELINES ,INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST \/97 13
E;<!.:J" 1 ;-11"7' "rIn. 2--
"'~_..II.._~"""~."", ",,-,_
t. 13 oF I\C(
Potea1ilily
Signifiamt
Imp""
Pofenlially
Sipifica;ol
UnJess Leulban
Mi.alioa Si8l1ifi.ca;ot
lAoorporated ImpllCt
No
Imp""
11.
Population. Will the proposal alter the
location, distribution, density, or growth
of the human population of an area?
Explanation:
xx
The possible future addition of one single,family home will not alter the location, distribution,
density, or growth of the human population of the area.
12.
Housing. Will the proposal affect existing
housing, or create a demand for additional
housing?
Explanation:
xx
The possible future addition of one single-family home will not have a significant impact on the
supply or deDlJl1ld for housing in the area.
13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the
proposal result in:
a, Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement?
Explanation:
xx
The traffic generated by the one additional single-family home would not result in significant
additional vehicular movement.
b. Effects on existing parking facilities
or demand for new parking?
Explanation:
xx
The construction of a single-family home will result in a marginal increase in parking deDlJl1ld.
Sufficient off-street parking will be required to be provided to meet this increase in demand,
c.
Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systems?
xx
TOWN OF TIBURON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW GUIDELINES -INITIAL STIJDY CHECKLIST 1/97 14
EXHIBIT NO. '2-
P, tY of:. Ll9
Poten1bllly
Signi.fic:anf
Imp""
PoteRlUlIy
Signi.fi0Ul1
thI_ Lc=s6Tha
Mi.1i!:ati.on Signi.fical
Incorporated Im.,.a-
N.
1m""
Explanation:
The proposed project will not effect existing transportation systems. Traffic mi~gation fees would
be collected upon issuance of a building permit for the new residence.
d. Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods?
Explanation:
~
xx
The extended driveway would route traffic from the additional single-family ~ome to Stony Hill
Road. The circulation patterns for traffic from the existing single-family homeland duplex on the
property would not be altered. .
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail,
or air traffic?
Explanation:
---+
xx
The proposed project will not affect water, air, or rail transportation systems.
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrians?
Explanation:
The extended driveway would route traffic from the additional single-family hbme to Stony Hill
Road, rather than onto Tiburon Boulevard via the shared driveway utilized by th~ other residences
on the site. This different access is required by a recorded agreement which pr~hibits traffic from
the future house from utilizing the driveway leading directly to Tiburon Bouleiard. Utilizing the
access to Stony Hill Road should reduce the potential for traffic hazards by dp"ecting outbound
traffic down Gilmartin Drive rather than out the other undersized shared drive~ay.
--+
xx
14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an
effect upon, or result in a need for new or
altered governmental services in any of the
following areas:
TOWN OF TlliURON ENVIRONMENfAL REVIEW GUIDELINES ,[NITIAL SfUIlY CHECKL/Sf 1/97 15
EXHIBIT NO. '2..-
1>. 'L)" D1= l V1
-.-.......--.. _..._....,.._~--_...__.._.._..._._..._- ...--- ,.--_._---~...-._---_._._..~,-_.._.~~._----_.._----
Pon.liaIJ.y
SignifiClllt
1m,,,,,
PoteJltilllly
Sipificant
"""" L<oo",..
Miligalion Significant No
Incorporakld Impact Impact
a. Fire protection?
Explanation:
xx
The proposed project will not affect fire protection services, but the extended driveway may serve
to provide additional fire access to nearby homes and undeveloped areas. The Tiburon Fire
Protection District has reviewed the plans (see letter dated December 14, 1996), and has indicated
a need for a turnaround at the end of the extended driveway and a fire hydrant and water main at
the base of that driveway.
b, Police protection?
Explanation:
xx
No law enforcement issues are foreseen for the proposed project.
c. Schools?
Explanation:
xx
The number of school children generated by the additional single-family home will not be enough
to have a significant effect on school services for the community.
d. Parks or other recreational facilities?
Explanation:
xx
The addition of one single-family home will not result in a significant increase in the demand' upon,
or the supply ot; parks and recreational facilities. Quimby Act fees would be collected from the
subdivision, if approved.
e,
Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads or storm drain facilities?
xx
Explanation:
The drainage study prepared for the proposed project indicates that the additional runoff generated
by new development on this property will not exceed the capacity for the storm drain facilities
serving this site, The culvert on Tiburon Boulevard has a capacity to handle 164.6 cubic feet per
TOWN OF TIBURON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW GUIDELINES ,INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST 1/97 16
EXHTRITNO. 2-
~. lip cP Il'1
POlellli8lly
Significant
1m,,,,,
PoteatiaUy
SipifiClllt
lhIlcss U:Hn..
MiliguOll ~CIllI
boorporated ImpllCf
N.
1m,...
second (cfs) of runoff; which is well above the estimated 103.3 cfs generated by a 100-year storm
from the watershed which contains the subject property (Source: Drainage study prepared by
Bracken & Keane, October, 1996 [Revised January, 1997]).
f. Other governmental services?
Explanation:
xx
The project has no potential to affect the delivery of government services.
15. Energy. Will the proposal result in:
a, Use of substantial amounts of fuel
or energy?
Explanation:
xx
The proposed project will not result in the use of excessive amounts of fuel or energy.
b, Substantial increase in demand upon
existing sources of energy, or
require the development of new
sources of energy?
Explanation:
xx
The proposed project will not result in the use of excessive amounts of fuel or energy or require the
development of new sources of energy.
16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in
a need for new systems, or substantial
alterations to the following utilities:
a. Water?
Explanation:
xx
The proposed project will require approval of a variance for water service by the Board of Directors
of the Marin Municipal Water District, because the proposed third lot is not fronted by a water
main. The water systems will not require substantial alterations to provide service to this property
TOWN OF TIBURONENVlRONMENTAL REVIEW GUIDELINES ,INITIAl. S11JDY CHECKLIST 1/97 17
EXlIIBIT NO. 2-
'Y. I~ 6F ll"
Potentially
~Cllllt
Imp""
Pote:ntillDy
Significant
Unlen LeuThaa
Mi.a1iou. Sigaificant
IncorpoWed ImpKt
No
Imp""
(Source: Letter from Marin Municipal Water District, December 19, 1996).
b. Sanitary Sewer?
Explanation:
xx
The proposed project will not require substantial alterations to existing sanitary sewer systems to
provide service to the one proposed house on this site.
c. Storm water drainage or storm water
quality control?
Explanation:
xx
The proposed project will have a marginal impact on stormwater drainage due to the increase in
impervious surfaces resulting from the construction of one single-family home and an extended
driveway. The drainage improvements proposed (catch basins, ditches, easements and other
improvements), will reduce the stormwater impacts to a less than significant level.
17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in:
a. Creation of any health hazard or
potential health hazard (excluding
mental health)?
Explanation:
xx
The proposed project will not create any unusual health hazards.
b. Exposure of people to potential
health hazards?
Explanation:
xx
The proposed project willllot expose people to any unusual health hazards.
18. Aesthetics, Will the proposal result in
the obstruction of any scenic vista or view
TOWN OF TmURON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW GUIDELINES ,INITIAL 5TUDY CIIECKLIST 1/97 18
E:dGIIBIT :NO. 2---
.
~ I U~ D~ It c(
PotenUlly
Significaa.t
Imp"
Potaltilllly
sip.6caat
Unleu I.eM.1baa.
Miligalion Significaa.t
h1~ Impact
N.
Imp""
open to the public, or will the proposal
result in the creation of an aesthetically
offensive site open to public view?
Explanation:
xx
The proposed project involves the future construction of a single-family home on a lot situated on
a slope above two other lots. These two other lots are developed with, respectively, a single-family
home and a duplex. The proposed home will be clearly visible only from the homes on the two
other lots of this subdivision. The view of the proposed house by other nearby homes would be
screened by existing vegetation to the north, east and west, and by the two other structures within
this subdivision to the south. Ifleft unmitigated, the presence of a new house above the other homes
within this subdivision could result in reduced vistas for these residents. The placement of the
proposed home and incorporation ofIandscaping into its design should be thoroughly analyzed
before final approval is granted for this additional home.
Recommended Mitigation Measures:
The following condition should be applied to the Conditional Use Permit:
18. I. Prior to the issuance of grading or building permits for the proposed single-family
home, the building design and landscaping shall receive Site Plan and Architectural
Review approval pursuant to Section 4.02.00 of the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance. The
building and landscaping shall be designed so as to minimize and effectively mitigate
visual impacts to the surrounding residential neighborhood,
19.
Recreation. Will the proposal result in
an impact upon the quality or quantity of
existing recreational opportunities?
Explanation:
xx
The addition of one single-family home will not result in any significant impact on existing or
planned recreational facilities,
20. Cultural Resources.
a. Will the proposal result in the
alteration of or the destruction
TOWN OF TffiURON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW GUIDELINES .[NfrlAL STUDY CHECKLIST [/97 19
1I:-;rrIT~T'T' "1. :-10. '2.-
~-~ ?~~L~' ti- Wr
Potentially
SignifiCllllt
Imp""
Potentially
SipifiCllllI
....... u.._
Mifisalion Sipificut
mcorporated Impact
N.
1m"",
of a prehistoric or historic
archeological site?
Explanation:
xx
No known prehistoric or archeological sites are located on the subject property,
b. Will the proposal result in adverse
physical or aesthetic effects to a
prehistoric or historic building,
structure, or object?
Explanation:
xx
The proposed project will not affect any historic or prehistoric structures or objects,
c, Does the proposal have the potential
to cause a physical change which would
affect unique ethnic cultural values?
Explanation:
xx
The proposed project will not affect unique ethnic cultural values.
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade
the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below
self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant
or animal community, reduce the number or restrict
the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal,
or eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory?
Explanation:
xx
The proposed project is limited in scope and does not have the potential to degrade the quality of
the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to e1iminatl'l a plant or animal community,
TOWN OF nBURON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW GUIDEUNES ,INITIAL STUDY CIlECKUST 1/97 20
E}]JI'P.IT J>TO. z...
.
? z.o' ()~ \\9
Potea.1iIIy
SigRifiglmt
Imp"
Potenti.llly
SipifiCllllt
uw. c...lbm
Miti&alioa SipiJiCllllt
Incorporated Im~
N.
Imp"
reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or ~nim~l, or e1iminate
important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory,
b. Does the project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage
of long-term, environmental goals?
(A short-term impact on the environment is
one which occurs in a relatively brief, defmitive
period of time, while long-term impacts will
endure wen into the future.) XX
Explanation:
The proposed project, if approved, will not affect any long-term environmental goals.
c. Does the project have impacts which
are individuany limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (A project may impact on
two or more separate resources where
the impact on each resource is relatively sman,
but where the effect of the total of those
impacts on the environment is significant?
Explanation:
XX
The alignment of the extended driveway could conceivably affect the design of any development for
the property over which the driveway passes. The site-specific impacts of these design effects are
difficult to ascertain at this time. However, Staff anticipates that these impacts can be adequately
addressed during the review of any such future development plans, which could include realignment
of the driveway.
d. Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial adverse
effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
Explanation:
XX
The project is a minor subdivision and construction of a single-family home and extended driveway,
TOWN OF TIDURON ENVlRONMENI'AL REVIEW GUIDELINES ,INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST 1/97 21
'i"n-F""QT'fl "-1.0 2---
1!..:J~"':'.J..J..L'~..... J.~. 4
l '1...( t5f: Iter
which will not cause any substantial adverse effects on human beings.
III. Discussion of Environmental Evaluation
(see each discussion item above for narrative
description of environmental impacts.)
IV, Determination (To be completed by the Lead Agency.)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a
significant effect on me environment, and a
NEGATNE DECLARATION will be prepared
[ ]
I find that although the proposed project could
have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this
case because the mitigation measures descnoed
on the attached sheet have been added to the
project, A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL
BE PREPARED.
[X]
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant
effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required.
[ ]
2ltJ Cf7
Date
'~
\ M,~~~
antel M. Watrous, Sernor Planner
For Town ofTiburon, California
C:\WPDOCSIPC69602.ISC
TOWN OF TillURON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW GUIDELINES -INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST 1/97
22
exBL Q:ll'f" I-Jb, _ 2- --..
1'. -zL 01=' W1
EXHIBITS
A. Proposed site plan dated December 13, 1996,
B. Biological study prepared by LSA Associates dated October, 1996.
C. Geotechnical report prepared by Earth Science Consultants dated April 6, 1996.
D. Drainage study prepared by Bracken & Keane dated January, 1997.
E. Letter from Tiburon Fire Protection District dated December 14, 1996.
F. Letter from Marin Municipal Water District dated December 19, 1996.
TOWN OF TIBURON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW GUIDELINES -INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST 1/97 23
E"~7T-:rTP'T. ~l:i;O 2..-
.'~:~~J..~....J"::,,. ',..
~. 2.-2> OF- Il <1
DOCUMENTS REFERENCED OR CONSULTED
1. Safety Element of the Tibmon General Plan, 1989.
2. U.S. Government Flood Hazard Map, Community No. 060430 A, November, 1976.
3. California Storm Water Best Management Practice Handbook for Construction Activity,
March, 1993.
TOWN OF TlBURON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW GUIDELINES ,INITIAL STUDY CHECKUST 1197 24
1<'~{TJT"[Yrm ".-1." 2-
_t.:.J~..~_LL.1~~_,...l 1. '. J.
f, 2..Cf 6F II?
_,ll..
Ide
I,hh
I
'-~-'
-, I
":0_. ....
r I
\ :J~ '. .
\ ii \w~...~ I
\ t~ IO,~"-"" II
'I vCQ
Q/l ";~ ~,., J'
t~t J' J.C, j/
:::', ::=:...-- ".~.--~;~' -~n,
- ',...~.. I.,..,
.~ ;A<.:""".--'-=='-" -' .~ .;;. I ,g.',
// ---..... ,....::-. .-,!:.:.::.- ~
; / .~.t~.~7~';-"='.-~'::::--':_:~~'-. ./.... I ..~. 1"3,~e:'
~ ~. eft 2C '''l'l~ ~ ,"""~:A.....,i-tt
1 ,-; >1_. ," I ~l..,A'f~"'. '.. _ - .'
/}
II . Nejo.r~ ,,~. Nlf) """,j
; <,J~25''''.l7.1>' "'/!.rie.... ~.Ao.JD UT\~lT.,. eM.,e(-:.o.'
f-
l'- exl"1f. %-Nel"- ~"".
~- \
/
,.
/
,.
.>
~I'\~~; ..
Il \ .--. .~._ '____
~J It ;'
.1 Ii, ______ ~.: __
l- ----..J~~ .'Kf
! \ ~l~ GoAp.. .--~-
: , .,....,e L o::AT.1or" ~
!l1 !"'\.JA"".' WCATIOIol . ',> I
TO' ~ pec,."",,"ED
\ NI:fuu;,e(1'1f)..
. \- l-OT3
~ / \ ... ~o= $<=-
;~ .. ~ ,~
i-.l\. .. ":{"
"';' -- .~~
:= 11 \.., _' ~;'..t~~ ~-.~1'" I'!~,...~.)
" 'j. ,-~.."I--" ~.~
': r.
'0
~
L...:..-.:::. ---- .. --
Dtl.PI'
_ ,- -. "l-C<:~
.- t..-lNt!.
--
~':/..l.::
,/" :-: ;,',..:...J,.
,,).. Ne.w t't
,~
---
L--
.~
-
- '--
2.Q- ,
;
-- ._~~., ....----
----.---
"~\.'"
~ ~::.-_.m-....--.
,
I'
t
-.
, ,."'Ort.
:r.""'::~:~~;::=;~_.j:~:...,".:.:..~(
,~<.:.;-
'.~'
....cr
I".of :-.\';~
.~ ~. ..."
~
~
.;s
.,=
,
- .----. r:--
,."l~-.J':lJ,.
"" .' --.-
./'.0 i
~.,.. J
if . !
/ . ~ :-~
',;"' "'1"1 jiJ (. ~.i ",0_ ,;_
..j tf i /l.'-
~ ./ Ul j!f . ~ /'
k.r !. " \.
-~~~,'~~-~~ ~,
-=-- ],,,;M.oj
~-'--' .
"--"~ I
L.-or \
11,:;,'24
c.
"
!..7'jel-"'!~F;~
:~"""".~: (1<';)
,
/,
,
.,
.......".
.
o
'.
,p
l
,
''''''
I/.q
... .-r
..-..,. .~- '-
::.,.~:-t
,
.l
'\
.
lJ'~i A~ l...t..Q
-1I..1T"f ~I:.NT
P1..A N .
~..A.\"e..' 1"-20'
EXHIBIT NO, A
l, '()~2-
"'0"",
~f
.....~':
.~~..
,;tIl'..
Y-:-T:(7_JTQ-rrp "--T-n 2-
~...::::..J....i':"'':-'.'~'"'' 11......,.
1>, 2..-5 0F \l ~
I
i:ljHiW:f
If" 'J '.
1'( I","," I,
1,1 .~
,I'I"f 'llE
.Ilt.fllill
~ ;
· i
A
- .
. .
. .
o
<
~
.
,
o
:<
;=
m
"Ill
!1;]l
,,>
0:0
,.""
C0m
0" Z'
,,~-
,,"~
_ " ~
;10 em
~>
"Z
~m
..
o
. ."
..
.-
~ S ~>:r
"-~ .'Z~
,0....
<\I -~)l
~ ~ z:. -t
tJE ~~<
-L~0l~'
_ z>
~g~~~
H
n
~i.
&~
. !fa m
-.
::;J
!>>:
H
f'
.11
"'.
~Jt
;....-1
r.::J
i-W
~ ~-I
. t,:)
;:4
~~
6" ';:-;J
--.1
00
~L.
..:0 I'......
--'d
.
l:rJ
@
>-<
ttl
>-<
:-:3
'7
~
P
~
f'}
o
1\
\
Ii
"!jl
~:!
<:> :u
am
- ()
~~
~~ "-_I
1i~ rf
~~ \ ' '" --I
'Z: i'
~j\ \ I
~ I >~
"l I I
I z~ I
0-
.z -~~:
~ ,,;, ~..I'
H I
~
.:.-1 I
I I ;
I
I L- \>, ~ I
_----- I
_: __:.-..1
~~
.'31
~'~
~
~
~
i
,if 1 \ --\-;--; I
J, ~. \.\., . r''\'''' \ z: I
I ~--.J \ ~ .../ ,~.
i · ~ 1 I ~ I
r ,I l I
L ! ~",', I:
_~_- ~ __J I
Ii' ... :!l
C D ... ;;
i ;; . :? '"
~ .- .- :<
.. :l' < . . :l' m
. 0 .. " .. ! . D . S' ,.
il ;; 0' 5 " ii " ~. . . !l'
m D .
!!. n . . . . , s . 0
~ ~ .- '" . ~ . " ~
~ n g 0 c " S
. " 0. .
;1 .. c ~ .
. " o. " " c . ~ =
~ ~ D ~ . .'
~ ~ ~ ..
~ ..
. '"
il c
..
!!. 0.
Z .-
~ 0:
~
om
!l:~
c <
3 =
0'
a
.
;;
..
..
m
..
'"
:r ~ t
on ;j1 ~
. ~
~
J
o
3
~
.
o
~
:$ ;:
a !l:
3 n
Q ~
"
.-
<
..
0'
.
c-
.
0.
=
..
a
c
.
!!:
.. '"
~ .
~ .2-
;;
G'l .-
. 0
.
.. ~
m if
.-
2 ~
if
E l :%l
5- a: :
3: _~ ~
c 2.
~. !: ~
;;.
!!.
~
QI i
o
..
"
if
~ g: nUlm
~ 0......
~ ;Q~
f:!
o.G1g.
!!a.~
,. :::
no'
>:0-
'f!!J
..'
N.
....
~CDO
"..-
c .. .
. 0
o ...
.~ ::l "0
n" D
. c f
~. .
..D'
..'
....
N-
o;'
c-
.
:r
,a
.a
c
.
!!:
D.
.
c-
.
0.
.
,a.
a
3
!!:
.
.
0.
'I
i
..
.
f
C
r
r
r
I
J
.i
...
O--'r::':'j"\!J-;::~
L \.." '-,y
:. '. 109'
J : ~ 0
TCV11'J c;= T!5UhCN
Fl.";;~:~~:';G J. Ct.::L~~:-":3 CEn
":--,
f
~
l
,;
L.~
) ,.
~
l
c
L
L
L
L
BIOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE
POWER PROPERlY
TIBURON, CALIFORNIA
October 30, 1996
Prepared for:
Toby Power
885 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
Prepared by:
LSA Associates, [nc,
157 Park Place
Point Richmond, CA 94801
(510) 236,6810
LSA Project #TOB630
'P. '-1 of lli
EXHIBIT NO.l:L
~. l OF- lip
T'~TT_TT"':'Tm j"_"'!f'A ...,
~'::"",._, "1 ,,,tv. (....0'
- --.................... - _ '4. . .
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
I
I
1
L
L,.:;y"
.'-.."..." '.
'-;1':-,
1
t
L
L
L
L
LSA Associates, Inc.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
INTRODUCTION ""'"",....,..".".,.,.".".,.""." 1
PROJECT DESCRIPTION , , , . , , . . . , , , . . , , . . , . . , . . . . , , . ,. 1
REGUlATORY CONTEXT ".",..,."...,...".",..." 1
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. . , , . , , . . . , . , . . , , . , , ,. 1
California Department of Fish and Game . . , . . . , , . . . .. 2
California Native Plant Society . . , , , , . . . . , . , . , , . . . ., 2
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ...,.,....,....,..,.. 2
SURVEY METIfODOLOGY ..""....,.""..".,..,.""".., 4
RESULTS ,."...""",."'.........."..............,.,, 5
VEGETATION ., ,. , . . , , , . . . . . . , . . . . , . . . . . , , . . , . . . , . ., 5
Lot3.....................,.................. 5
Access Road. . . , , , , , . . . . , , , , . , , . . . . , . . , . , , . . . ,. 6
WILDLIFE . , , . , . , , , . . . . , , , , . . . . , , . , . . . . , . . . . . . . . , . ,. 6
SENSITIVE HABITATS AND SPECIAL-STATIJS SPECIES ..",.,. 6
Potential Wetland ..",.,.."......".,.,..,..,. 6
SPECIAL,STATIJS SPECIES, , , . , . , , , , , , . . . , . , . . , . , . . . . . " 7
Special,Status Plant Species ,'.",.....,..,.,..,.., 7
Special-Status Wildlife "'."".,......,.,.....,,. 8
OrnER RESOURCES . , , , , . . . . . . . . , . . . , . . . . . . . . . , , . , , ., 8
Flood Plain or Ponded Areas ..,..",.,..........., 8
Archaeological or Paleontological Resources ....".... 9
Rock Outcrops . . . , , , , . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . , . . . . . , . ., 9
Existing Trails ,........................,....... 9
Knolls and Ridges ..,.."..,.,.......,......,.,. 9
POTENTIAL CONSTRAlNTS ..".,.......,..,......,...,..,., 10
REFERENCES . . . . . , , , , . , , . . . . . . , , , . , . . , . . , , , ' , , . . . . , , , , . -. 11
LITERATIJRE CITED .."....,........,.",.."..,..., 11
PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS ,............,...,....,. 11
APPENDIX A - Resource Conservation Map . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . , . . , . ,. 12
10130/96(po'TOB630\BIOLOGY.RP1)
I
L
E:~"'1-TT~Trp l\Tr~ z....
_~__..l..-<.... -.'. _ I V.
of. "2.. ~ of- t l cr
:EXHIBIT NO.~i
~ 2.. .bF lip
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
I
L
L
L
L
."
:. ~
l
[
l
LSA Associates, ["c.
INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) reconnaissance
level survey of biological resources present on the Power property, The report
includes: 1) an analysis of plant communities and wildlife present on and
adjacent to the property; 2) an analysis of sensitive habitats and special-status
plant and wildlife species potentially present on the property; and 3) potential
constraints to development.
As part of their review of the project, the Town of Tiburon requires an
assessment of biological resources on sites proposed for development in order
to evaluate the potential for impacts to sensitive habitats and special-status
species. In addition, the Town of Tiburon requires the preparation of a
Resource Conservation Map that illustrates biological resources on the
property. This report also contains the Resource Conservation Map that was
prepared in accordance with the specifications provided by the Town of
Tiburon.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Power property is located northeast of the junction of Las Palmas Road
and Tiburon Boulevard, approximately 350 feet north of Tiburon Boulevard,
in the Town of Tiburon, Marin County. The entire property totals 0.95 acre
and is proposed to be subdivided into three lots, Lots 1 and 2 currently have
existing homes and related structures. The undeveloped portion of the
property, identified as Lot 3, is roughly rectangular in shape and encompasses
approximately 0.46-acre. Lot 3, and the access road described below, is
presently undeveloped. Accordingly, 15A focussed our field biological
reconnaissance efforts on Lot 3 and the access road corridor.
The project includes an access road that extends approximately 540 feet from
the northeastern boundary of the property to the existing Stony Hill Road,
which encompasses approximately 0.35-acre. Surrounding land use includes
residential development to the southeast and southwest and open space to the
northeast and northwest, An un,named drainage is present approximately 40
feet southeast of the property boundary. Elevations on the property and
access road range from about 60 to 90 feet above sea level. The Resource
Conservation Map contained in Appendix A shows the above features and the
Lot 3/access road area evaluated in the field by 15A.
l
L
L
I
REGULATORY CONTEXT
U,S, Fish and Wildlife Service
The U,S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has jurisdiction over formally listed
threatened and endangered species under the federal Endangered Species Act.
The Act protects listed species from harm or "take", which is broadly defined
I0/30196(p,\TOn63O\BIOlOGY.RP1)
E~GlIDI'1' 1'10. Z
1>, 'l.C:; i)~ 11'1
1
EXHIBIT NO. 13
1>:3 o~ if,
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
(
I
I
l
1
[
L
L
L
L
L
L
LSA Associates, lnc.
as to "harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect,
or attempt to engage in any such conduct". An activity is defined as a "take"
even if it is unintentional or accidental.
An endangered species is one which is considered in danger of becoming
extinct throughout all or a significant portion of its range. A threatened
species is one that is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable
future. In addition to endangered and threatened species, which are legally
protected under the federal Endangered Species Act, there are informal lists
of federal species of special concern. These include federal candidate species
(formerly category 1 candidates for listing as threatened or endangered) and
federal species of concern (formerly category 2 candidates for listing as
threatened or endangered). Federal candidate and federal species of concern
are generally afforded no protection.
California Department of Fish and Game
The California Deparnnent of Fish and Game (CDFG) has jurisdiction over
State-listed threatened and endangered species under the state Endangered
Species Act. The state and federal lists are generally similar, although a few
species present on one list may be absent from the other list.
The CDFG also requires a Streambed Alteration Agreement for the fill or
removal of any material from any natural drainage. The jurisdiction of the
CDFG extends to the top of bank and often includes the outer edge of riparian
vegetation canopy cover.
California Native Plant Society
The California Native Plant Society (CNPS) has developed lists of plant species
that they consider rare, threatened, or endangered plants in California
(Skinner and Pavlik, 1994). Although the CNPS is not a formal regulatory
agency, the species on their List 1B (plant species considered endangered in
California and elsewhere) and List 2 (plant species considered rare, threatened
or endangered in California, but common elsewhere) may warrant mitigation,
CNPS List 3 and List 4 plant species represent plants that require more
information to evaluate their status and which are of limited distribution,
respectively.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the U,S, Army Corps of Engineers
(Corps) is responsible for regulating the discharge of fill material into waters
of the United States, Waters of the U.S. and their lateral limits are defined in
33 CFR Part 328.3 (a) and include streams that are tributary to navigable
waters and their adjacent wetlands. Wetlands that are not adjacent to waters
~-~~--"""-'T' ~-O "2.-
::"'(_--1 " _, 1 '\ .
. .,......... ,.'
--...!.H-"-_......._.-..-_.. ~_ 1 J .
~, 3b \)~ Il cr
eXHIBIT NO, B
1>.- " DF 1(,
2
I0/30196(p,\TOB63O\BIOLOGY,RP1)
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
I
(
I
LSA Associates, Inc.
of the U.S. are termed "isolated wetlands" and in many cases, are also subject
to Corps jurisdiction,
In general, a Corps permit must be obtained before placing fill in wetlands or
other waters of the U .5.. The type of permit depends on the acreage involved
and the purpose of the proposed fill. FiIls of less than 10 acres are sometimes
covered by Nationwide Permits, in which wetland losses may be mitigated by
creation of compensatory wetlands (after minimizing loss to the cctent
possible) and in which public review is not required. Fills of less than one,
acre may not require mitigation under a Nationwide Permit, An Individual
Permit is required for projects that result in more than a "minimal" impact on
wetlands. Individual Permits require evidence that wetland impacts have been
avoided to the extent possible and a review of the project by the public.
~
l
L
L
l
L
L
L
L
EVLTT"r)IT "~.o ...,
. .{J...L-,U..;J. _ 1 ,/ , '-
.? 'bl OfJll
"TTTBIT NO, ~
'f. 5 OF
3
l0I30196(P,\TOB63O\BIOLOGY.RYI)
ICo
r
r
r
[
r
r
r
r
[
[
LSA Assocl4les, 1m:.
SURVEY METHODOLOGY
Prior to conducting the survey on the Power property, the California Natural
Diversity Data Base (CNDDB 1996) and the Draft Environmental Impact
Report for the Marinero Estates Precise Development Plan (!.SA 1993) were
reviewed for records of special'status plants and wildlife, as well as sensitive
habitats, that could potentially occur on the Power property. A survey of the
Power property was conducted on October 10 and 21, 1996. Vegetation
mapping involved walking random transects through the O.46-acre property
(Lot 3) and walking the entire length of the proposed access road, Plant and
wildlife species observed and potentially sensitive habitats observed were
recorded in field notes and mapped on a 1"=20' scale topographic map of the
property and the access road.
The October 10, 1996 survey was conducted by an LSA wetland scientist (Ross
Dobberteen, Ph.D.) and the October 26,1996 survey was conducted by an LSA
wildlife/plant biologist (Don Schmoldt). The scientific names of plants
conform to those names published in The Jepson Manual: Higher Plants of
California (Hickman 1993),
t
L
[
[
r
l
l
L
L
l0f30/96(P,\TOB63O\BIOLOGY.RP'I) EmmIT NO. B
EXHI3ITNO. ~ _ f. .~ OF IL:,
P. ~2. OF \l~
4
r
r
r
[
r
r
r
[
l
L
L
L
[
L
L
l
VEGETATION
Lot 3
l
L
L
LSA Associates, !rlC.
RESULTS
The project site was used for a commercial vegetable garden that was under
cultivation for a number of years until the 1960's, The proposed access road
follows an existing road bed that may have been created as early as the 1930's
that extends from the end of Stony Hill Road to the property. The existing
road has not been in use for many years (Dixon Power. pers, comm.).
The undeveloped portion of the property, Lot 3, is surrounded by dense
stands of French broom (Genista monspessulana) to the nonheast and
nonhwest, several large California buckeye (Aesculus calif arnica) and a stand
of Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor) at the southeast boundary, and
residential development to the southwest, A stand of coast live oak (Quercus
agrifolia) is present about 100 meters nonheast (uphill) of the property. The
proposed access route is surrounded by dense stands of French broom on
both sides, with individual coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis) shrubs present,
Vegetation on Lot 3 consists of non,native grassland, dominated by non,native
grasses including wild oats (Avena sp.), wildrye (Lotium sp,). barley (Hordeum
murinum) and ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus). with small stands of other
grasses including millet (Panicum milaceum), dog-tail (Cynosurus sp,),
nitgrass (Gastridium ventricosum), and pampas grass (Cortaderia selloana),
present,
Herbaceous plants present on the lot consist of individual and small stands of
non,native species including bristly ox-tongue (Picris echioides), willow-herb
(Epilobium brachicarpha), common sow thistle (Sonchus oleraceus), tarplant
(Hemizonia congesta), mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), horseweed (Conyza
sp.), white cudweed (Gnaphalium luteo-album), and bull thistle (Cirsium
vulgare), Native species includes scattered individuals of umbrella sedge
(Cyperus eragrostis).
Shrubs consist of several small coyote brush shrubs that occur individually on
the lot. A small dense stand of Himalayan berries is present at the
southeastern boundary of the property and a hedge of Solanum sp. has been
planted in the eastern corner of the site. Trees present on the site consist of
several sapling coast live oak, one sapling pine (Pinus sp.), and two sapling
coast redwoods (Sequoia sempervirens), all recently planted on the lot.
In the western portion of the site, there is small area within a very shallow.
swale, encompassing about 30 feet x 10 feet, where patches of hydrophytic
("water loving") plant species are present. This potential wetland area is
dominated by wildrye, a plant that OCcurs in both wetland and upland
l0I30196(p,ITOB6301BIOLOGY,Rl'1)
5
0~,'"T.T'"" ir:1 "'-0 ...,
'; ~! ,~ ; . ;,' J . I,. t,,-.
-'-~-"-f'33 "6~')J1
"'XHffiIT NO. B
r. 7 OF 1(,
r
r
r
[
[
r
[
(
1
[
1
L
L
L
L
L
l
L
L
LS'A Associates, Inc.
habitats. The potential wetland also included individual and small stands of
hydrophytic species, including fiddle dock (Rumex pulcher), umbrella sedge,
common knotweed, willow-herb, and bristly ox-tongue, Other plants are
present in the potential wetland that more characteristic of non-hydrophytic,
upland areas, There was no evidence at the time of our survey of wetland
hydrology conditions, In addition, an inspection of the soil did not reveal the
presence of any hydric (wetland) soil characteristics.
Access Road
Most of the length of the proposed access road has been recently cleared of
vegetation for land surveying purposes, The road has not been used for some
time, as evidenced by the presence of French broom, Individuals of redstem
storksbill (Erodium circutarium), wild radish (Raphanus sativus), milk thistle
(Silybum marianum), tarplant, bull thistle, white cudweed, and French broom
(seedlings) are present in the cleared road bed. There are no trees present
along the proposed access road.
WIllJUFE
Wildlife observed on and adjacent to the property include those species that
are adapted to shrub and grassland habitats, as well as to horticultural
plantings around residential dwellings. The limited diversity of plants and
plant communities on the property provides habitats for only a small number
of wildlife species. Wildlife observed, or evidence of their presence observed,
in the grassland, and on the proposed access road, were California towhee
(Pipilo crissalis), white-crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys), striped
skunk (Mephitis), and black-tailed deer (Odocoileus hemionus columbianus).
Wildlife observed in the French broom stands adjacent to the property and
access road were wrentit (Chamaea fasciata), California towhee and white,
crowned sparrow. Wildlife observed in horticultural vegetation around the
residential dwellings, adjacent riparian corridor and in the stand of coast live
oak stand east of the site, were great horned owl (Bubo virginianus) (heard
only), Anna's hummingbird (Calypte anna), northern flicker (Colaptes
auratus), western scrub'jay (Aphelocoma californica), northern mockingbird
(Mimus polyglottos), white-crowned sparrow, house finch (Carpodacus
mexicanus), and lesser goldfinch (Carduelis psaltria).
SENSITIVE HABITATS AND SPECIAL,STATUS SPECIES
Potential Wetland
In the northwestern portion of the property, there is small area within a very
shallow swale, encompassing approximately 30'xlO', where patches of
hydrophytic plants are present. This area could potentially be subject to Corps
jurisdiction, However, because of its small size and the long history of
10130/96(P,\TOB63O\BIOLOGY.RPT)
2--EXHIBITNO, .B
E=C:=~-.~~ l~. t~ ~ f. ~ O~ If,
6
r
r
r
r
[
r
[
I
1
I
L
l
[
L
l
l
l
l
L
LSA Associates, Inc.
disturbance to property, which includes use of the property for vegetable
production, the potential wetland may not be considered jurisdictional by the
Corps, The location of the potential wetland is shown on the Resource
Conservation Map (Figure 1 in Appendix A).
SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES
A review of the CNDDB (1996) and the Draft Environmental Impact Report
for the Marinero Estates Predse Development Plan (LSA 1993), prepared for
the Town of Tiburon, indicates the potential presence of seven special-status
plant species and two special-status wildlife species in the vicinity of the
property and proposed access road.
Special-Status Plant Spedes
Special,status plant species that occur on the Tiburon peninsula that could
occur on the property are: 1) Tiburon Indian paint brush (Castilleja affinis
ssp. neglecta), which is listed federally as endangered, by the state as
threatened, and is a CNPS List 1B species; 2) Tiburon jewelflower
(Streptanthus niger), which is listed federally and by the state as an
endangered species; 3) Marin dwarf flax (Hesperolinon congestum), which is
listed federally and by the state as a threatened species, and is a CNPS List 1B
species; 4) Tiburon Mariposa lily (Calochortus tiburonensis), which is listed
federally and by the state as a threatened species, and is a CNPS List IB
species; 5) white-rayed pentachaeta (Pentachaeta be//idiflora), which is listed
federally and by the state as an endangered species, and is a CNPS List 1B
species; 6) Tiburon buckwheat (Eriogonum luteolum var. caninum), which
has no federal or state status; and is a CNPS List 4 species; and 7) Gairdner's
yampah (Perideridia gairdneri ssp, gairdneri), which is a federal species of
concern (formerly a federal category 2 candidate for listing as threatened or
endangered) and is a CNPS List 4 species, It has no state status.
The Tiburon Indian paintbrush, Tiburon jewelflower, Marin dwarf flax,
Tiburon Mariposa lily and white-rayed pentachaeta occur on serpentine
derived soils, Because of the absence of rock outcrops on and near the
property, the parent rock from which the soils on the property were derived
could not be determined during the course of the biological assessment. Two
small boulders of serpentine were found along the existing access road. These
rocks were loose and were presumably transported by humans to the access
road, Pebbles found in the top layers of soil on Lot 3 were not serpentine.
Because of extensive historic disturbance to the property for agricultural
activities and the probable absence of serpentine derived soils, special-status
plant species are not expected to occur on the property,
:i::.~~~.-~\r'p "7".;-J 'Z-
-~""""--,-"",,,,,,,,,,,-~ -~ ..l. I .
1, 75' f)F It cr
~XHIBIT NO. i
p. q l>F I ~
7
I0I30/96(Po\TOB63ll1BIOLOGYRP1)
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
(
I
1
1
L
L
l
l
L
L
L
LSA AssocUltes, 1m:.
Special-Status Wildlife
Special,status wildlife species that could potentially occur in the vicinity of the
property are two invertebrates, the Tiburon micro,blind harvestman
(Microcina tiburona) and the Opler's longhorn moth (Adela oplerella), The
Tiburon micro-blind harvestman is a federal species of concern (formerly a
federal category 2 candidate for listing as threatened or endangered), It has
no state status, The harvestman is known only from the Tiburon peninsula
and occurs under serpentine rocks in moist areas within open grassland,
The Opler's longhorn moth is no longer a federal species of concern, It was
formerly a federal category 2 candidate for listing as threatened or endangered
but was recently removed from this list, It has no state status. The larvae of
Opler's longhorn moth feeds on cream cups (Platystamen calif amicus) , a
native plant species.
The Tiburon micro-blind harvestman and Opler's longhorn moth are not
expected to occur on the property and proposed access road because of the
absence of serpentine boulders and the likely absence of cream cups, due to
extensive disturbances to the property,
OTHER RESOURCES
In addition to sensitive habitat and species of special concern potentially
present on the property and proposed access road, the Town of Tiburon
Planning Department requires an assessment of other noteworthy or unusual
site characteristics that may occur on the property and proposed access road,
The locations of these characteristics, if present on the property, are shown on
the Resource Conservation Map in Appendix A.
Flood Plain or Ponded Areas
There are no flood plains or areas where flooding or ponding occurs on the
property or proposed access road. The property is on the southwest facing
slope of a hill and there are no watercourses that drain onto or through the
property.
A drainage is present approximately 40 feet southeast of the property
boundary. Development of the proposed single residence on the property
would not directly impact the drainage. However, the project proposes to
install a "Y' ditch and a storm drainage pipe which will outfall into the
drainage. Placement of a minor amount of rock rip rap (approximately 4 feet
by 4 feet) is proposed for the outfall site, Depending on the final design, this
construction may require a permit from the Corps for any work that may occur
within the drainage encompassed by the Ordinary High Water Mark. This
work may also require a Streambed Alteration Agreement from the CDf'G for
any activity within channel and banks. The work associated with the outfall
1
L
._,~~--~-~ .....-0 l--
,.".('., .'" ":"J' l 'i'
;, l.T ,'" ,-'; ., -',;'. ..1...
___ ......._._~____~;.. ..... ..l. I .
F. ;~ f)~ \It:t
EXHIBIT NO. is
p. I-D bF I (p
8
10130/96(p,\ TOB630\1l10LOGY.RPT)
r
r
r
r
r
f
(
[
1
I
l
L
L
L
L
l
l
l
L
LSA Associates, Inc.
installation in the drainage would meet the terms and conditions of permits
that are routinely issued by the Corps and CDFG, In general, the drainage is
not considered by LSA to be a valuable resource in terms providing functions
such as wildlife habitat and the overall work would be minor, Therefore, this
future component of the project is not considered to be a significant impact,
Archaeological or Paleontological Resources
The property has been extensively disturbed for many years. There is no
evidence of archaeological sites on the property, nor are there any
paleontological rock formations on the site,
Rock Outcrops
There are no rock outcrops on or adjacent to the property and proposed
access road,
Existing Trails
There are no trails.on the property. The existing access road that extends
from Stony Hill Road to Lot 3 was apparently constructed several decades ago.
The road has not been in use in recent years, as indicated by the presence of
French broom in the road bed.
Knolls and Ridges
The property and proposed access road are on the southwestern slope of the
hill. There are no knolls, ridge lines, or other promontories on the property
that would provide long-range views. .
11---,....,.-,-.7,-., """",-'"1 ~
, ~ i 1. l..l: ..J.
_J_~_~'._~: -~7 OF t l Cj
EXHIBIT No.L
1>. II OF 'i,-
9
10130196(p,\TOD63011l10LOGY.RYI)
f
r
r
J
r
r
[
[
I
[
L
L
L
L
L
l
.
LSA Associates, Inc.
POTENTIAL CONSTRAINTS
LSA's biological assessment of the Power property found that no special-status
plant or wildlife species are expected to occur on the property and proposed
access road, because of disturbances to the property resulting from historic
agricultural activities, There are no unique physical features present on the
property or proposed access road.
Sensitive habitats on the property consist of one potential wetland in a very
shallow swale in the northwestern portion of the site, which contains patches
of hydrophytic plants, The presence of hydrophytic plants in the swale may
also be a function of historic disturbances to the property. The wetland area
could potentially be subject to Corps jurisdiction, Prior to construction, a
delineation should be conducted using methodologies described in the Corps
of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987),
which involves the examination, in greater detail, of the presence of
hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soil characteristics, and evidence of inundation
or saturation by surface water or ground water, If the area was considered by
the Corps to be jurisdictional, fill of the wetland meets the terms and
conditions of permits that aTe routinely issued by the Corps. In general, the
small wetland is not considered by LSA to be a valuable resource in terms
providing habitat for wildlife and sensitive plants, as well as providing other
recognized wetland functions such as nutrient transformation and flood
control. Therefore, this future component of the project is not considered to
be a significant impact.
l
L
L
1T;:<T--rf"":'"'1"'r :'J r~-
"""'--'_-"-_--"-__.........l. -... _, J.
'?' .~ <6 Cl~
1-
l\~
EXHIBIT NO. ~
P. 12. OF l/P
10
l0I30/96(P,\ TOn63O\BIOLOGYRP1)
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
(
I
I
I
L
[
L
LSA Associates, Inc.
REFERENCES
llTERA1VRE CITED
California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB). 1996. Spedal-status species
occurrences report for the USGS San Quentin, California, quadrangle,
California Dept, of Fish and Game, Natural Resources Division,
Sacramento, California,
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation
Manual, Technical Report Y,87,1, U,S. Army Engineer Waterways
Experimental Station, Vicksburg, MS.
Hickman, ].C,(Ed), 1993, The Jepson Manual: higher plants of California.
University of California Press, Berkeley, California,
LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA). 1993. Draft Environmental Impact Report for the
Marinero Estates Precise Development Plan, Prepared for the Town of
Tiburon, LSA Associates, Inc" Point Richmond, California,
Skinner, M.W, and B.M. Pavlik. 1994. Inventory of rare and endangered
vascular plants of California (5th ed,). Spedal Pub!. #1. California
Native Plant Society, Sacramento, California.
PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS
Power, Dixon; owner of Power property, Tiburon, California.
L
L
l
L
L
"IT:\.~T'~l']1 -;\7:J -z....
---,..;.-,,-,_.~"":"_...-'.l. _... ~ I .
1>. 3q ()~ H 9
EXHIBIT NO. "!
P. I~ l>F I~
11
I0I30/96(P.\TOB63O\BIOLOGY.RPT)
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
(
I
I
L
L
L
L
l
l
l
l
L
LSA Associates, Inc.
APPENDIX A - Resource Conservation Map
l0I30/96(p,\TOB630\BIOLOGY.RPl)
17:< ~::!-r;,11'f1 Yj. O. 2-
~....;..... ____....... _i.i. .
p, 40 f)F- !19.
EXHIBIT NO. E 12
.
'P. /'-/ DF I~
r
r
r
r
r
r
(
(
I
[
[
L
L
L
L
l
l ~
N
L LS. Ai, Sealeiafe" Resource Conservation Map for
!L ~ 0 40 SKI-EEIT NO.~5B Tiburon Boulevard, Tiburon, CA
L 1T''''7'T-'~'-.,.'-n ~. ~r, '"2- 'b ~
b':~C_.:o_~L l'j J, T, t~ OF Ib
p, lil c:>PIL'l
81
q
~,_r
-" -.......
~
):~
. \11l-J""'2~'''' 17.0'
I
-13
01",
ale;. ---...._ ~ \
~\~ :.~-- ~
..rr~/ /' /. . c' -j?:::.
/-~-c.-" / .I / __ / / //71 \
-- .-/ .-/5"1/~/~1. / / ",/
.-/ --- ~ -:.--
/ .-/ ---:::--:::--:-".--- --.:::::-- /" /' ------:/
,.~ / // //" / /"'
~ // ---~.// / /'/ /' /'" ,../ ,./" ..
~ --- ----- /' //' /~
-~ ---///'/.
//----- --- ...-/ '" / /// /t.
r ___-~ .,.".---- /' // / / I 1:
----- --.-----' / / / / /
(1 ----------- //,o' ----- --- ./ ///,o'/ / J \.,
-- ,../---/ //
~'7---- / /' __-/ // // ,../ ,o'\
+, / -- / /" ~,::. // / /" \
.. --=-JJ / /;;::--:~/.;-----____ !_\
,... ----- _../ / / / /-,..1--;7-_ I J7E:; ~ )
~ ..-r-- 0 ?-__~ ~o 1-
~ _.-.....-~ ~ ..-r---, /",1/ ___ - I't. \
\I, -- . - -- I / "- /'
. H_ -~.\ ......." -1/ / /' __
~ ~'''''''.. ~ I / ..--. ~
~ ... f ~ .~L' /..:-~ ~
1+ / ,,/ f
H I t"-/ 1,
'r- . ,,~- A,
I ~;- J \rfTf~
r~~/~ ~;- : ,!
,.0' i :; ---- I I
!/ ,'-. ~;;;: 1 ~
~. ~. u." "'. J -; , "...:. ;7 - .'/ i /
/ ry,;/ I.
~ -~ l /rfl" / r -/
/ .., ~_. ~-==--- \ I
/.--<1'....
-" .~. - J
,;, ,,~..,&' "
N~.O"" 20-t-/ ....."'Te.1L \.l""~ t ~1~"'c.,e. eA">E... .. ....
O9,3l>-96(TOB630)
Figure 1
~ POlentiaJ Wetland
r
r
r
r
r
r
(
(
l
l
L
L
L
l
l
l
l ~
N
l LSA
L
~, ,'-..../
::> I 1, ,
a. I:. ~-.... <'--.I / I
~ -t-.\ \ \ ---=--'-" -L '
t1'1 ---~
><
-,
'"
-
5'
""
en
5'
::>
'<
~
-
-
::0
o
'"
Co
I
I
I
1
I
/-"ZI~.., i VTt"'f1'1' ~. I
. I
.I ~ /' ..-:n-.P"I""I
0-!.-~'/ -~/ ~-13
____ :::.:--:;; I'"
. . 1"-
.- . , .n
:I="
'--'1 : . I=:
. ':. -I~
. . -../ _Iell
"r"~~. ...::.._--'-:::-=-.........--~. ---::;:;7~....-: -<:-- /. ,-::--:..:-:;1
t'...._~ .~ ____~--- ~...-----""' ~/ ./ ;/ /1' ./ ./ / I
.--.-:---- ~- -I
I . -------:::::.__-=----.".. ",..-----/ / ..-" / ./". ........ -:/,1
I -- __- ____ -/ // "..-/' _","" 'I
I - _ ,.,..--- '" . / I
I ---:.__--- ""...---:,/' /' .../ I
I I
1 .
t ;/
I ft GOR:oI ~
k. ~/ . ,,;lJ~.No<O_.......__
e--~""'" ~"
:-;::::- -::::: ~ ..-/....6~ . ,
I
.1.
3 1 :)
",......'
n I -
=- ., ,.
~ /'
::1 /.' .
CD ~_ ..
L..:::---:f--::::--- __ :
r/' ,-' --- ---.,,"-- ---', , .... I / / / /" -",'
I ..... __- ~ _ .,/,/ /" ./ _
I _- ___-- ____ -",' / / / /
I __. ___............. /' ,.- ,/
I ...--:- ___ ......- ..--- ./ ~ // /
1 - ~_____...........- -
I _ _ l3
~ ~ I~
~o ()
::r
5'
0-
-
,""""pQIl.OWA."tUn 1'1'1' ~'.
,/ ,I /,.
Q9,3()'96(TOB630)
. Ficrure 2
o
1J:}:..,~-,=r2I'r 1\;:0. 2,..
p( Lf2--oF 11'1
Scale io feel
o
40
Resource Conservation Map for
EXHIBIT NO. B 885B Tiburon Boulevard, Tiburon, CA
'P. (f# OF /10
r
r
r
[
.".'
'h
r
[
'~'1
[
1
[
,...
L
.';
L
EARTH SCIENCE CONl:iULTANTS
SOIL . FOUNDATION AND GEOLOGICAL ENGINEERS
P.O, BOX 341O/SAN RAFAEL/CALIFORNIA 94912,3410/ (415138]..0935
April 6,1996
Job No. 962489
Dixon Power
885B Tiburon Blvd.
REC~~'HED
AUG 0 8 l~':Ib
Tiburon, CA
94920
TOWN OF TISURON
P!..~~N!~G & eU~!.D~~G DE?1:
Report
Geotechnical Investigation
Two Proposed Residences
885B Tiburon Blvd., Lots 3 & 4
Tiburon, California
INTRODUCTION
This report
we recently
presents the
performed at
results of the geotechnical investigation
the above site.
,..'
qr}:''':>',;'
,'=:'1:'i?";.c,<."
We understand that it is desired to construct a new single family
residence within the upper portion of Lots.3 and 4, as shown on
the preliminary tentative map prepared by Bracken & Keane, Civil
Engineers-Land Surveyors. We also understand that it is desired
to construct a new common driveway about 400 feet in length from
the end of Stony Hill Road to the upper portion of Lots 3 and 4.
~.
t
[
L
L
L
L
The purpose of our work was to perform a visual site observation
and reconnaissance of exposed surface features, review existing
soil and geologic data of the area, log representative exploration
pits, and provide our opinion in the form of conclusions and
recommendations as they relate to our specialty field of practice,
geotechnical engineering.
lj'''t,-:?,'c-:-::-ml '\,T0 o? EXHIBIT NO,~
~..:..L...........:._........'.~...... l. i J. <--
'P. 4~ D~ ll't 1>. I OF &;7
r
r
r
[
r
r
[
[
L
L
L
".
". ':'.'
j ,,:,",(,,:c
. _ ;, ~jl .,,','
1
'f.;,t
[
L
L
L
L
L
Lots 3 anc. ,.
Page 2 - April 6,1996
Our scope of work included only subsurface conditions within the
actual proposed structures and did not include accessory areas
such as sidewalks, porches, decks, landscaping, garden and yard
areas.
T;""'[U,-r:>7lT1 ""0 'J
.!..:.J.i:....i...i...l..........i.l.J...i:' . '-
EXHIBIT NO. G-
'P. '2. ~ (07
?, Lf4 of Ii'(
[
j
r
;
~
f
~
~"',
l-
ot .
'1
i -,
;! { t
~ .{. ;1
-.t,-
,
;
1
,
,
l
j'
t,'.' '~A;.;':' '~.
. ~'-","~"
. .~. ,"f",.'
.:': ;'~/:~.)-:.
~I.~> '
r!r.....~
~. '~'1i~~'.
. L."(;
,.
<.' .
"
[
L
[
l
[
Lots 3 an
Page 3 - April 6 1996
SITE CONDITIONS
The two proposed new house sites are located upslope and north of
the existing older house at 885B Tiburon Boulevard, as shown on
Site Plan, Plate 1.
The area of Lots 3 and 4 slopes mildly downslope towards the
southwest with an inclination generally varying from about 6
degrees to 14 degrees. At the time of our investigation the two
lots were covered with grass with dense brush present on the
upslope and adjacent terrain. A small winter season drainage is
present a short distance to the southeast of the Lot 4 property
line. Located within the western portion of Lot 3 we observed an
apparent seepage and wet area.
Located in the lowe~ porti~n of the greater property is an older,
one-story, wood frame, single family residence at 885B Tiburon
Boulevard that appears to have been constructed in the 1930's.
Located in the lower western portion of the greater property is an
existing two-story, wood frame structure known as 885C and D
Tiburon Boulevard that appears to have been constructed in the
1960's. We understand that the current owner has resided at the
885B residence for the last three years.
Extending from the end of the fairly newly constructed Stony Hill
Road is an older, rough-graded, rough dirt road varying from about
10 feet to 18 feet in width with an upper cut slope up to about 5
feet in height, with an inclination varying from about 1.25:1 to
1:5 (horizontal/vertical), that is steeper than the current
standard of cut slope construction of 2:1. Along the downslope
side of the old, rough-graded road, we observed an older fill
slope up to about 5 feet in height, with an inclination of about
1.5:1, that is also steeper than the current standard of fill
_.-~---~--, ~ -) ....,
.L;.~:lt_~'-:'_~I_L' .1.1 l'i . L-
~. </S"" OF \['1
EXHIBIT NO, C.
7.3oFCo7
r
r
r
F
,
[
.'
"I" .
.. ",.,;"
'_ _ 'ftt;,"';.\~~
r
\~'f<,
f":
-::~.t~.
L
'/<~' :~)':
. ~ ,..'
L
,~. -" ,\'-'
..,.......
f~
L '
'pt' .~'es.;"'~.
... .. ..<.-. "
. [?-.:.. '
~. f.~ _ ::
.~....'.."~.'...;.'.
J,' . y,~
':" ,'".;
. . "of'
t
L
L
[
[
Lots 3 an<- +
Page 4 - April 6,1996
slope construction of 2:1. As the old roadway appears to have
been constructed many years ago, it was likely not compacted and
merely pushed in as was the common practice for rough dirt roads.
In the southeastern portion of the old rough road area remnants of
two parallel rough roads appear to be present. The alignment of
the old rough dirt road and the adjacent upslope terrain is
covered with dense brush except for a recently cleared swath along
the road about 8 feet in width.
The subsurface conditions at the site were explored by exploration
test pits at the locations shown on the Site Plan, Plate 1. Each
test pit was logged by our field geotechnical engineer who
recorded the various materials encountered. Logs of the test pits
are presented on Plates 3 through 7. The Unified Soil
Classification Chart which was used to describe the various
materials encountered is pr,esented on Plate 8. Backhoe
exploration test pits were selected as the exploration method so
as to permit continuous observation of the various soil and
weathered rock materials encountered in an in situ condition.
In order to help evaluate the expansion potential of the plastic
site soils, a Uniform Building Code expansion test was performed,
as shown on Plate 9. The expansion test revealed an exp~nsion
index of 137, which is classified as very high expansion potential
under Table 29-C of the Uniform Building Code.
Expansive soils are generally clayey or silty soils that are
relatively sensitive to changes in moistur€ content. Expansive
soils can shrink and swell significant amounts with changes in
moisture content resulting in the uplift movement and cracking of
lightly loaded foundation elements, concrete slabs, and flexible
pavement areas. In addition, expansive soils may lose
E]:h.:rilEiITf ITC).
z.
EXHIBIT NO, G
..
y. '1(0 Dv It'1
-p,q. oF (PI
r
.
:r
I-
E
1
I.e..
-.;~
1
r
1.
G
1
" '
:~ '
l
;'t!.
J:'
.
::k,rq.--" ,
.v >"""
.. ~j /..''!:I,)'''O'
~ .0) t.~~t.
- -,'~t;-,.:.
..,'
1
\
[
l
l
l
Lots 3 and 4
Page 5 - April 6,1996
considerable strength when wet, and moderately to heavily loaded
foundation elements may experience plastic nonrecoverable movement
each season.
We have found that expansive soils are common in many areas of
Tiburon in soil materials that have originated from upslope
weathered serpentine bedrock materials.
The subsurface conditions within Lots 3 and 4 appear to vary
considerably, varying from locally moderately-shallow,
medium-quality bedrock to deeper, crushed and sheared poor-quality
bedrock, and deeper colluvial soil materials in the southeastern
portion of the property. Test Pit 2, in the upper central portion
of the property, encountered sandstone bedrock materials at a
depth of about 6.5 feet that became harder with depth. Test Pit
5, excavated in the lower central portion of the property,
encountered serpentine bedrock materials at a depth of about 10
feet that were closely fractured and highly weathered. However,
the subsurface conditions were poorer in the northwestern portion
of the property. Test Pit 1, in the upper northern portion of the
property, encountered crushed and sheared weak serpentine bedrock
materials at a depth of about 9.5 feet below the ground surface,
and it appeared to be a zone of ancient tectonic shearing, By a
depth of 13 feet, serpentine bedrock materials had become slightly
less weathered. In the lower western portion of the property,
Test Pit 6 encountered cruched and sheared serpentine at a depth
of about 15,5 feet that was completely weathered and appeared to
be a zone of ancient tectonic shearing. In the southeastern
portion of the property, Test Pits 3 and 4 encountered older
colluvial soil materials to the depths explored, which was 16
feet. The origin of the colluvial soil materials is probably
associated with the presence of the canyon bottom area and nearby
southeastern drainage.
-~-
'i'. ,. . ~,~;,-,~ - - ~ ...,
.J..:..'..::a....~~4..~...:_.~'__~1 ljJ (....,...-
'Po 47 OF Il~
RXHIBIT NO. L-
r.5"oPv,7
r
l
~
~d_,
,.
:q-:::,:,:...r.,.i
j~
{~
.\-
1 -",
o 1
r. ,L <
l ·
i l
, "
i
.
~. ',- '
Jot ;':'._':'1 '~,.'" "
<;:<Z:'wt~..
~ ~ ;.!'~P-'((.
.~ W;r:r;.;,...~.,.,
"S,~$::?":::
,-"
.,-'"
',.
',-'J'
..,:.,
L
l
,
L
l
L
L
Lots 3 ano 4
Page 6 - April 6, 1996
Test Pits 7 through 10, that were excavated along the proposed
common driveway, generally encountered better conditions than in
the proposed building area, with the underlying closely fractured,
highly weathered to severely weathered serpentine and sandstone
bedrock materials encountered at depths of about 3.3 feet to 5
feet below the ground surface with only Test Pit 9 encountering
a somewhat deeper zone of soil materials with the surface of the
underlying poor quality, very severely to completely weathered
serpentine bedrock that was crushed and sheared at a depth of
about 7 feet below the ground surface.
Observation of the "Geology Map of the Tiburon Area," prepared by
Salem Rice and Theodore Smith of the California Division of Mines
and Geology in 1976, indicates that the site area, as well as the
terrain for a considerable distance to the northeast, is plotted
as being underlain by landslide deposits. ~owever, our
geotechnial investigation did not encounter any obvious evidence
of landslide deposits. However, the highly plastic expansive soil
materials and locally wet conditions must be dealt with in a
prudent manner so as to mitigate the natural site conditions.
"'j7i",,:;-r"7'-;--r;-"'rl ....... '"":- """\ ~
.:":;..:L':-._~-:.":"._~.l. .i..'; '...J. L,....-
EXHIBIT NO. c..
P. (p DF (,1
f. '-l € DF Il'(
F
.
.
[
""
r
;1
(
.1>
(
~
If
~ (
! j
~ (.
~ -
- "
f
1
,
1
1
Lots 3 and 4
Page 7 - April 6, 1996
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the results of our geotechnical investigation, our
principal conclusions in the form of geotechnical engineering
opinions are as follows:
1. It is our opinion that the proposed development is feasible
from the geotechnical engineering standpoint if performed and
maintained in accordance with our recommendations.
2. We recommend that in general the proposed development be built
to conform with the existing hillside grade as much as practical,
and cutting and filling generally be minimized as much as
practical so as not to upset the existing gross site equilibrium.
3. We recommend that the proposed houses be placed upon deeper
and well-reinforced drilled pier and grade beam foundations with
the pier holes generally extending to a minimum depth of 20 feet.
4. The site soil materials beneath the top soil zone exhibit very
high expansive soil properties with a Uniform Building Code
Expansion Index of 137. However, expansive soils are relatively
common in Tiburon.
1
(
L
L
L
L
5. In the upper portion of Lots 3 and 4, above the proposed house
building areas, a deeper trench subdrain at least 12 feet in
depth should be constructed 50 as to lessen seepage effects upon
the property and proposed structures, and help improve the
stability of the soil zone,
.~ .
Specific recommendations are presented in the remainder of this
report.
~------ -z..
II"; . ',' !......-.-.,... -.~.....
..L:J_2...~-:~,__,..:..',.~'.l' J." ;J.
l tf'i DF U,?
EXHIBIT NO. C.
1. 7 oF CQ'/
r
r
r
~
r
k
j
l
1
t
1
}
1
1
t
1
'1
~
Lots 3 and 4
Page 8 - April 6, 1996
RECOMMENDATIONS
Develooment Scheme - We recommend that the proposed development
be planned, designed, constructed, and maintained so as not to
impact upon, influence, surcharge, undermine, or in any way
influence adjacent land and development.
We recommend that, in general, the proposed development be built
to conform with the existing hillside grade as much as practical,
and cutting and filling generally be minimized as much as
practical so as not to upset the existing gross site equilibrium.
In the house site areas where cuts are made, they generally should
be fully retained with engineered retaining walls, Unretained cut
slopes remove lateral support from upslope areas and thus result
in a degree of slope steeper than the natural long-term angle of
repose of the hillside that increases the risk of sliding.
From many years of geotechnical engineering experience in Northern
California, we have observed that generally the larger the amount
of site grading that occurs within a project, the greater the risk
of long-term problems including sloughing,sliding, erosion and
maintenance.
,
~ ';."
~c-' .
r
[
Therefore, we feel that it is important to keep the site grading
at this project to an absolute minimum. Of course, we realize
that some grading will be required in order to provide the
driveway and parking area. However, the driveway and parking area
should be so located that the amount of cutting and filling
generally can be kept to a minimum,
I
L_
.q"3IT NO, c..
r. cg OF ~I
l_
L
~-----~-- ,-"" ..,
E~~,~~'::'.'::'~~'-Li ..=.';'-J. L-
f.5b bF 1l'1
F
F
r
)
[
;p
T
f'
.,[
t'
J
I
;[
i
t
f
~l
I
Lots 3 and 4
Page 9 - April 6, 1996
House Foundations - We recommend that the new houses be placed
,
upon deep and very strong drilled pier and grade beam foundations.
Because the subsurface conditions vary considerably over the
proposed two house building sites, the foundation recommendations
are based upon the poorest of the site conditions encountered.
We recommend that the drilled piers be a minimum of 18 inches in
diameter and be drilled to a minimum depth of 20 feet and be
placed upon no more than about 10 foot centers.
It is very important that all drilled piers should be connected
with grade beams in both the upslope-downslope direction and the
side-to-side direction. This requirement is because in the areas
of deeper soil the piers may be subjected to lateral soil creep
effects and the tie-back condition is necessary, Also,
interconnection is required under Section 1807.2 of the Uniform
Building Code, 1994 edition.
The top 10 feet of the drilled piers should be assumed to provide
no vertical support. Below a depth of 10 feet a skin friction
value of 500 pounds per square foot for a dead load plus live load
may be used. Fifty (50) percent of that value may be used for
uplift,
t
[
l
l
L
For resistance to transitory lateral loads such as wind or
seismic, a lateral passive pressure resistance of 100 pounds per
cubic foot, equivalent fluid weight, acting upon 1.5 pier
diameters may be used with the top 1 foot neglected. This may be
increased to 200 pounds per cubic foot, equivalent fluid weight,
acting upon 2 pier diameters below a depth of 10 feet.
~-~--~--l - -~ 2-
~0..!~L-_.L'.=.,,_~..i fi ..j'.
EXHIBIT NO. C-
"P. 't fF fo7
& 51 CF 11'1
r
r
r
[
r
,
r
'k
[
,,'
"
[
,
l
[
<:
[
t
J;",
1,'['
~
~
1
(
L
l
l
!
Lots 3 and 4
Page 10 - April 6, 1996
The drilled piers should also be designed for lateral soil creep
forces of at least 50 pounds per cubic foot, equivalent fluid
weight, acting upon the top 6 feet of the piers upon 2 pier
diameters. The soil creep force may be resisted below a depth of
10 feet by passive pressure resistance of 150 pounds per cubic
foot, equivalent fluid weight, acting upon 2 pier diameters.
Because the clayey soil materials exhibit very high expansive soil
properties with a Uniform Building Code Expansion Index of 137,
all grade beams should be underlain by at least 4 inches of
low-crush strength void form type material such as Burke Void,
Nelson Void, Verticel void forming cardboard, or other low-crush
strength porous cardboard type material commonly used for
expansive soils that will allow the expansive soils to swell and
heave upward without affecting the above grade beams.
All piers should be poured promptly after drilling, and care
should be taken that the pier holes are straight and no
mushrooming or overbreak occurs at the top of the pier holes, as
mushroomed pier holes expose horizontal areas to potential adverse
expansive soil uplift effects.
Because wet conditions were encountered in Test Pit 6, including
significant caving from 1 foot to 9 feet below the ground surface,
we anticipate that the drilled piers in that area will have to be
promptly poured as they are drilled, and if caving occurs they
will have to be cased in the caving portion.
We would also recommend that the drilled piers extend at least 6
feet into the underlying very severely-weathered bedrock formation
so as to provide some settlement control. However, in Test Pits 3
and 4, that were excavated to depths of about 16 feet, only older
-.-----..-- ~ -~ r) EXHIBIT NO c..
L.:L..,...._L.' L: ..). ~ < .
f. Sz- ~ tier y. lo r.F fu7
r
r
r
r
"
r
r
,
[
L
l
L
l
1
~,
1
~
[
L
L
L
l
!
Lots 3 and 4
Page 11 - April 6, 1996
colluvial soil materials were encountered and not the underlying
very severely-weathered bedrock formation. Therefore, in that
area and in some local other areas it is likely that pier holes
greater than 20 feet in depth will be necessary. We, therefore,
recommend that the drilling rig used to drill the pier holes have
a single Kelly bar drilling depth capactiy of at least 30 feet.
The actual pier hole depths will be determined in the field by the
geotechnical engineer and may vary significantly across a specific
house~building area. In areas where the underlying bedrock
materials are of better quality, such as in Test Pit 2, the
drilled piers might be terminated as shallow as 6 feet into the
underlying bedrock formation. However, in the southeastern
portion of Lot 4, in the vicinity of Test Pits 3 or 4, piers
deeper than 20 feet would be necessary.
The above foundation recommendations for a very strong and deep
drilled pier and grade beam foundation system are based upon our
objective of mitigating the variable and locally poorer subsurface
conditions. Our opinion that the proposed residential development
is feasible from the geotechnical engineering standpoint is based
upon that the variable and locally poor subsurface conditions will
be mitigated by the use of a very strong and deep drilled pier and
grade beam foundation system. Thus, the designers of the house
and foundation should not reduce the minimum requirements as
indicated in this section of the report and as indicated on
Plate 10. If our minimum requirements are lessened, then our
opinion that the proposed residential development is feasible from
the geotechnical engineering standpoint should be considered to be
revoked.
The only manner in which the foundations could be of lesser design
would be for us to be retained to perform a supplemental
geotechnical investigation with exploration at the four corners
and middle of the actual proposed house, and written
recommendations provided by us.
1T'"";{!.1:c_""-Tr1i :'.7,-', ~
.J...:J..;...l..-..l._...........J. J.lJ.
EXHIBIT NO. c..
f. " OF (,7
f. $"!l op lj c:l
r
r
r
r
r
r
'.i'
I
I
[
L
[
t
1t.-
;1:- .
t
~
[
[
L
L
l
1
~ . :-j
Lots 3 and ...
Page 12 - April 6,1996
Special Slouqh Wall - On all hillside locations, including
hillsides of average stability, there is an irreducible risk that
the soil zone could experience sloughing or sliding during periods
of intensive or prolonged rainfall and/or earthquake ground
shaking. Another risk common to almost all downslope lots is that
the roadway fill emba~kment could slough or slide towards the
house. Therefore, to help mitigate this inherent risk, we
recommend that the upslope side of the house foundation be
extended at least 4.5 feet above the finish outside site grade.
This extended house foundation would serve as a slough wall and
should be of sufficient strength and reinforcement so as to resist
potential lateral slide effects. This slough wall should never be
backfilled, as its purpose is to restrain soil materials which
might tend to push the house off its foundation. The slough wall
should be designed for a lateral earth pressure of 90 pounds per
cubic foot, equivalent fluid weight.
n-r-:-,-:;--..-r-, ":\-- '1
~..;'~"':'.::...:.:-i..L l\J. ~
EXHIBIT NO. c...
'P. 11. OF ~7
PI 54 ~ Wi
r
r
r
r
r
[
","
,~"
r
[
L
L
L
J,
,
1
'~
l
L
L
L
L
L
Lots 3 and 4
Page 13 - April 6, 1996
DeeD Trench Subdrain - Above the house area, probably within about
10 to 15 feet of the upper property line, we recommend that a deep
trench subdrain at least 12 feet in depth be constructed so as to
improve the stability of the site soil materials and lessen the
aggravating factor of underground seepage effects. The deep
trench subdrain should extend at least 20 feet on either side of
the projection of the house, as well as across the entire front
portion of the house. The deep trench subdrain should slope at
least 2 percent to drain, and hopefully be discharged into the
adjacent southeastern natural winter season creek,
~------- - - 2--
'J" -.' :~__,.,:" ',I 'l '"" 'J
_'!.:J...:.L...J....;,....:..I;~ L 1.,;.: '.
EXHIBIT NO. c..
~. I~ DF ~7
p. 5~ 'OP..Ll <1
f
r
r
r
r
r
I
I
l
l
l
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
Lots 3 ana 4
Page 14 - April 6, 1996
Retaininq Walls - Within the two new residential lots we would
recommend that generally all permanent cut slopes should be fully
retained with engineered retaining walls. The retaining walls
should extend to the top of the cut slope area, plus provide at
least 6 inches of freeboard. Not extending the retaining walls to
the top of the cut slope and beyond the original ground slope
surface could result in future erosion, sloughing or sliding.
In areas of level backslope, retaining walls should be designed
for a lateral earth pressure of 45 pounds per cubic foot,
equivalent fluid weight. In areas with a 3:1 backslope
(horizontal to vertical), retaining walls should be designed for a
lateral earth pressure of 50 pounds per cubic foot, equivalent
fluid weight. In areas where the retaining wall backslope is 2:1,
then the retaining walls should be designed for a lateral earth
pressure of 60 pounds per cubic foot, equivalent fluid weight. In
areas where the lower part of, the retaining wall is in reasonably
.competent bedrock, then the portion of the retaining wall within
the underlying bedrock may be designed for a lateral earth
pressure of 30 pounds per cubic foot, equivalent fluid weight.
All retaining walls should be provided with back subdrains similar
to that shown on Appendix 2.
Retaining walls should be supported upon deeper drilled pier and
grade beam foundations similar to that used for the house
foundations. If retaining walls are necessary, then we should be
contacted so as to provide supplemental retaining wall
recommendations. For nonstructural site retaining walls that are
separate and detached from the house, a lateral passive pressure
resistance of 100 pounds per cubic foot, equivalent fluid weight,
acting upon 2 pier diameters may be used with the top 1 foot
neglected.
zXHT?T? I'TO,2-- EXHIBIT NO. c...
P.. 5JpDf; It '( ? , l4 Or:: (p 7
r
r
r
(
r
r
I
I
I
I
L
L
"
L
l
L
L
l
L
L
Lots 3 ana 4
Page 15 - April 6,1996
Drainaqe - We recommend that all of the site drainage waters from
the house, roofs, patios, driveways, and new access driveway be
collected and discharged into the adjacent natural southeastern
creek via the drainage system as shown on the preliminary
tentative map. The beginning northwestern end of the new driveway
should discharge into the Stony Hill Road storm drain system.
Between the southeastern end of the new common driveway and the
southeastern property line of Lot 4, a 2 foot wide type "B"
concrete v-ditch should be installed in accordance with the
requirements of Drawing No. 260 of the Uniform Construction
Standards of the Cities and County of Marin that would end with a
catch basin and be discharged into the project storm drain system
as designed by the civil engineer. The purpose of this
approximately 60 foot long concrete-lined v-ditch is to intercept
surface waters flowing from the hillside above prior to reaching
the house site. Constructi~n of the new common driveway will tend
to intercept surface waters flowing from the hillside above.
-....."l'"T'~-~_~ - -...... l...
~: j' . .. " " " -.. :' ; ,,' ; \ ; '; ...
~..:..''---'::..-.;..l.~,J.J1. .J..-'~'J.
fi'XHIBIT NO. c..
'r. l'Scr ~7
?, '57 OP llct
r
r
r
r
r
r
[
[
I
L
l
L
L
L
l
l
l
L
L
Lots 3 and 4
Page 16 - April 6, 1996
Seismicity and Earthquake Hazards - Review of the State of
California Division of Mines and Geology "Fault Map of California"
indicates that the site is located about 9 miles west of the
Hayward Fault zone and about 8 miles east of the San Andreas Fault
zone, which experienced great movement in 1906.
Review of the pUblication entitled, "Maximum Creditable Rock
Acceleration from Earthquakes in California," prepared by R.
Greensfelder of the California Division of Mines and Geology,
indicates that the site and general area could experience bedrock
accelerations of 0.5g.
Therefore, it is our opinion that the site could be subjected to
strong earthquake vibrations at least once during its useful life.
We recommend that all structural, architectural and mechanical
details be designed to resist earthquake ground shaking. The
design engineer should emphasize the principles of continuity,
ductility and high energy absorption.
We trust this report provides the information you require. Please
call if you have further questions.
The following are attached and complete this report:
Plate 1 - Site Plan
Plate 2 - Driveway Plan
Plates 3 through 7 - Logs of Exploration
Plate 8 - Soil Classification Chart
Plate 9 - Expansion Test Results
Plate 10 - Foundation Details
Appendix 1 - Site Drainage
Appendix 2 - Subdrain Details
Appendix 3 - Wall Surcharge Details
P. ~ OF net
"'XHIBITNO. C.
P. l(P OF (P7
~;> ,:-'7P~'1l "1\7.." 2-
.li..:.J~.~...::... ",..., '-,c'- 'f
-~- .- _.~ .... ~ .........
r
r
r
(
r
r
(
I
1
L
l
L
: .:r~<~,~f.
L
l
L
L
l
L
L
Lots 3 ana -+
Page 17 - April 6, 1996
Appendix 3.1 - House Appendages
Appendix 4 - Fill Placement
Appendix 4.1 - Hillside Fill Details
Appendix 4.2 - Fill and Cut Slope Maintenance
Appendix 4.3 - Existing Older Cut and Fill Slope Maintenance
Appendix 5 - Effect Upon Adjacent Land
Appendix 6 - Construction Safety
Appendix 7.1 - Wind loading
Appendix 8 - land Maintenance
Appendix 8.1 - Earth Buttress Details
Appendix 9 - Limitations
Appendix 10 - Construction Observation
Appendix A - General Recommendations, Risks, Material Notes,
Responsibility, limitations and Related Items
Appendix B - Section 832, California Civil Code
Appendix C - Concrete Slabs
Appendix G - General Foundation Notes
Appendix I - Nuisance and Liability for land Condition
Appendix S - Sidewalks, Curbs, Patios, Etc.
Appendix U - Utility Trench Erosion Control
Appendix V - Vegetation Erosion Control
You s very truly,
""'-.".)
Jay A. Nelson
Principal Geotechnical Engineer
Civil Engineer - 19738, expires 9/30/97
Geotechnical Engineer 630
3 copies submitted
E}=-~IBI'r f,Tel. &
'}', 5C( l>F 117
EXHIBIT NO, c..
P.nOF~7
r
r
r
r
r
r
(
l
I
L
t
,L ,'~,:,
.:~ . _-,~.fl';"--..'
.lJl7;"tr~~: I.~ ~ - .
Tr:"
[
l
l
l
L
L 1./,11,.
- ---
---
,...,,-
Tf-l I' P:I-
I
I
oj /2.0 ~ ..
.f / (ot 3
.,;\
\l,.1 \/1 "
.;,' - ~. J ~o
~ f.~ ~ '
~ - ~\.
~ ~ J'u,D...ysz. /
~ .c lYer a,,'1<t.
" ./
~
\
----
/""
./
./
~o
,
/
/
{of /
I J'''.,.y """
lI.u/s,
c,'''CA. -/IJo
(of iI
---
-
,
,
~/
T. /i/'",,.DA /Jlv/.
Ti'}2-:D:'TT rTO. Z-- 1>. 18 OF lP7
f. ~o OF /1'1
,O'fS' Q,DP"&: /).../e l/'S'Ptf
...-
f I
..
c.v".!tD
#88f"c<
~
{.t 2-
.-2. St.,.r..
r'~"'L J;.,."
c" ~/
/)
ca.
Wu~
c/~'JL
.,~o
'-..."
EXHIBIT NO. C-
3., 'DO ./
~/./
/
,/ J'I,,~JZ.
./ <f ,,/' C(JIt~
.. /'
J NO
./
".
--
r
Jl.ea'''-PQ I
I
...
/'
./
,..---
-
C'VI'O,t
/
o
.
20'
,
30
.
J' CA./JI-
J';f~ PI..",
88 S 8 r;b..NM (J/.../.
r:6...,.,,^,. CA,
,,0
I
I
,
I
,."
J ,)"'.. /1
. JY:"t.,.
, .f'~Q.f'() "-
j..,p,.a.;na.y.sz.
,
,
I
Yo'
.
Plate
/
r
r
r
r
r
I
I
I
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
l
L
.L :1"611,,. ,6z'f8j
'.t
~ d
o-,q \
d~ .....
}" \ ....
~.\' ~
~ i\k---\--
, ~ 1 \
J lit \ ~
, ,- , '"
Ill'\. ~~
I I '\ ~"
I 1 \ ~
"", '
~d' ...'1......;<-
011 '.\,,~
~ Ol I ...
~.. I ..
~.~ \ 1 '-. ~
,~ 'I \
~' I
I ~I
\ Jf
"'d II ,~I '\
"'~ \ , I "-
:' ...
~'j,. \ 'J 1
:: cl __'_~
I,;)~ PI'l
I
,-ilt- , \
\'"
'\ , I
\ I 1
I,
1 1\
, 1
,~, \
I~ I
I ,
I I I
, ,
I I
IJ~~:TT":'T'T' "....0, '"7
I B1~._=--_-:._-)~ -"-- L~' . '--
~-...
~, (Pi OF tl'?
o
...
.
.:l
\
\
I
,
~
, ~
~ \I
"
'"'
o
app,.~ Dale l{.e-9t{
EX...HIBIT NO. L
:po ICf DF ~7
(),.;"L""...Y 1'10.... Plate
8 8 S' 8 r; h... ,."" 1)/,,/.
,:6..,.,,1>.,. CA, .2
r
r
r
r
r
r
(
(
[
[
l
1
',~~.
[
L
L
l
l
L
L
Shear Strength (Ibs/sq ft)
o
o
~
i
~o
o
o
~
00
~
00
,0
o
~
l!....
.. ~
'5 C
~ ..
~ ~
.- C
a a
:::Eu
~
~
u
a..~
~ ~
.c~ Q)
.~ -:. 0..
>.,C a. E
- Y .. a
Oao",
o
~
5
LOGOF Tot/','!'/
Equipment /Jack ~o.Jl,.
Elevation ex/sr. Cr. Date <(.3'90
_DARK BROWN SANDY SILT (ML), soft,
wet, with small rock fragments
(topsoil)
LIGHT GRAY BROWN SANDY CLAY (CH),
med. stiff, wet
Larger seepage @ 5.5'
Stfff @ 6'
fff
III
GREENISH GRAY WITH PURPLE SANDY CLAY
(CH), stiff, moist, with chert &
serpentine rock fragments & zones,
crushed & sheared (apparent zone of
" ancient tectonic shearing)
OLIVE GRAY SERPENTINE, crushed &
sheared with abundant slickensides,
very severely to completely weath-
ered (zone of apparent ancient
...... tectonic shearing)
OLIVE GREEN SERPENTINE, closely
fractured, highly weathered, low
:;hardness, friable, with severely
~~~neb(~-7PJ.r1 ;0,',. Z
Equipment BocA-";"L
Elevation ex/st. G,.. Date Y" 3 'Yo
18.:v _ /71'.*
-
h
'*.f~ tl'~ :7~
18~ 7t:*
-
The I 9 of s bsurfc ce con Hitions
show herej, appli s only at the
speci ic bori gar te t pit 0 probe
locati non th date i dicated It may
not b repre entative of sub urface
condi ions at ather r calions and/or
other imes.
10
15
o
5
- DARK 8R().,N Sl\I'DY SILT (11.), soft, I<.et, with
5IlE.11 rock fragrents (topsoil)
LIGHT GRAY BROWN SANDY CLAY (CH),
- med. stiff, wet
Stiff@ 2.5'
_ LIGHT GRAY BROWN SANDY SILT (ML),
stiff, damp, with angular sandstone
, rock fragments
GRAY BROWN FINE GRAINED SANDSTONE,
closely fractured, highly weathered,
low hardness (KJf-ss)
w/'S OBSERVED
NO FREE WAit:R BORING AT TIME
IN TEST PIT OR HoWEVER.
OF INVESTIGAT\~R TABLE MAY
THe. GROUN~:~AGE. MAY BE
RISE OF, G nlE WINTER
PRESEN, DURIN
~---- - - EXHIBI c..
',,- - I ' ,., ,. "'-
L~___'_ - - j Y'. ___ O.~7
EARTH SCIENCE CONSULTANTS 'P/- Or; LOG OF -rut ,.o;tJ /.(2-
SOIL. fOUNDATION AND GEOLOGI AL ENGINEERS W
1I't 88S IJ r/J,,;oo,. /3/,,0/.
"02..u89 Date y.8'96 7:6",.".. I' c.ot
Job No, T T __Ap , _
15
PLATE
3
r
r
r
(
r
r
(
(
[
[
L
L
L
L
L
L
l
L
L Job No, ? { 1. 'f 8 9
Shear Strength (Ibs/sq ft)
o
o
..:'
J'
>10
00
~
00
.:
l
\
lJ.h /71'.*
,
-
* S~ ~~ J.A4-l:
$~V7t: 1<
~
~
a-
" ~
5 "
- "
~ -
'0 g
~u
o
,
,:;f/
I
~
T
F'II
'.
~
EARTH SCIENCE CDNSUL TANTS
SOIL' fOUNDATION AND GEOLO CAL ENGINEERS
_A r.
Dale y. 8, 96'
~
~
u
a. ~
~ ~
c~ Q)
0- ...c -
~ - a.
>-." a. E
.... lU Q) 0
CCC'"
o
5
10
15
o
LOG OF TnI' /7;". 3
Equipment l3a.ck ~o.....
Elevation l:'x/sl'.C,.. Date <(.J.96'
-BROWN SANDY SILT (ML), soft, wet, with
rock ' fragments
-DARK BROWN SANDY SILT (ML), soft, wet
LIGHT GRAY BROWN SANDY CLAY (CH),
~ med. stiff, wet
Stiff @ 3.5'
~ BROWN & GRAY BROWN SANDY CLAY (CL-CH),
stiff, damp, with rock fragments
BROWN & GRAY BROWN SANDY CLAY (CL-CH),
,- stiff, damp, with abundant small
sub-angular & angular rock fragments
(older colluvium - QcoI)
Wi th occ. 3"- 8" size angular marine
volcanic greenstone rock fragments
;'.~beyond 13'
(Bedrock formation not encountered)
LOG OF TeN" ,a,',. it"
Equipment BaCk";.../!.
Elevation ["x;s1'. G,.. Date Y" 3 .,Po
- BROWN SANDY SILT (ML), soft, wet, with
small rock fragments
-DARK BROWN SANDY SILT (ML), soft,
wet, wi th rock: fragments
8" Boulder @ 2'
LIGHT GRAY BROWN SANDY CLAY (CH),
,..,. med. stiff, wet
Stiff @ 5'
Small seepage @ 3'
BROWN SANDY CLAY (CL-CH), stiff, moist
,..,. with abundant small sub-angular &
angular rock fragments (older
colluvium - Qcol)
F'XHIBIT NO, c...
P. 21 OF ~7
(Bedrock formation net encountered)
T;-nr::-.:,,"7"7_-;f1l ....\7,.-..1
f. ~ ~ of It'1
LOG 0 F ru l' P;I' J 3 ( yo P LATE
8850 r,'&lao,. /.J/v/. ~
7;6",.... . '"4
,
r
r
r
[
r
f
I
(
[
L
L
,[
'.~
l
L
L
l
l
L
~
;;g ~
.!L. 0._
~ -
'" - ~
!5 c .c- lU
-:;; ~ 0;; -:. 0..
.oc>-..ca.E
::::Edc~~~
o
Shear Strength (Ibs/sq ft)
o
o
~
J'
v.O
00
~
00
~
00
\0
t$.b- /71'.*
-
~
*.f~ ~~:7~
$~ 1/7t: ;<
-
The I ~g of s ~bsurf ce con ditions
show herei applie s only at lhe
speci ic bari 9 or Ie t pit 0 probe
locali non lh date i dicaled It may
not b B repre entalive of sub urface
condi ions at other' calians and/or
other imes.
--~--,..-..,. -....-
",L" ',-,";;':-'li .j
EARTH SCIENCE CONSULTANiS--'P --
SOIL . rOUNDA TlON AND GEOLOGI AL ENGINEERS ,<&,
L Job No, 9 0 ~ '18 9
Dale '1.8. 96
_Ap ,
o
5
10
15
o
5
15
LOG 0 F Tor -P: r /
Equipment l3a.ck":o.8-
Elevation .:)(/sl'. Cr.
Date <{. J. 96
DARK BROWN SANDY SILT (ML), soft,
- wet, with small rock fragments
(topsoil)
LIGHT GRAY BROWN SANDY CLAY (CH),
med. stiff, wet
Larger seepage @ 5.5'
Stfff @ 6'
fff
Jff
GREENISH GRAY WITH PURPLE SANDY CLAY
- (CH), stiff, moist, with chert &
serpentine rock fragments & zones,
crushed & sheared (apparent zone of
'- ancient tectonic shearing)
OLIVE GRAY SERPENTINE, crushed &
sheared with abundant slickensides,
very severely to completely weath-
ered (zone of apparent ancient
" tectonic shearing)
OLIVE GREEN SERPENTINE, closely
fractured, highly weathered, low
';hardness, friable, with severely
1>.eati1er8~~(~Jf-7PJ...r ,a,'J< l
Equipment BOCk ~ <1.1.-
Elevation ('"lst. Gr. Dote y. 3 '.96'
- DAAK BROrlI Sl\NJY SILT (M.), soft, 'net, with
SITl311 rock fragrents (topsoil)
LIGHT GRAY BROWN SANDY CLAY (CH),
- med. stiff, wet
Stiff @ 2.5'
_ LIGHT GRAY BROWN SANDY SILT (ML),
stiff, damp, with angular sandstone
, rock fragments
GRAY BROWN FINE GRAINED SANDSTONE,
closely fractured, highly weathered,
low hardness (KJf-ss)
wf'oS oasER\lED
NO FflEE '1'#AiER BORING AT TIME
IN TEST PIT OR HoWEVER
of INVEST1GAT~R TABLE MAY
TH;: GROUN~~/'AGE MAY BE
RISE OF. THE WlNif.fI
PRESION' DURING
_ EXHIBI C.
.J. 7 - ~. 2-0 oF-(~n
D':; LOG OF rUI,.o,'I; /i.2.
11'1 8850 r,'J",o,. /Jh''/
r:6",,,.. ('4
I
PLATE
3
r
r
r
[
r
r
I
(
I
I
L
L
L
L
L
L
l
L
L Job No, I ( 2.. '18 J'
~
~ ~
'#-_ u
_ o.~
~ -
., - ~
:s c .2:-- QJ
- QJ 0- ~ -
OIl _ ... __ Q.
.oc>-.ca.e
:E(Ja~~a
o
Shear Strength (Ibs/sq ft)
o
o
~
I
....
o
o
{
00
~
00
\0
PJ':~ 1/7,..*
'.
,
*.f~ t:l'~:r~
I,.
t!J~7t:-1'-
I 0
~;ll
I
~
5
T
fill
I
~
EARTH SCIENCE CONSULTANTS
SOIL . rOUNDA TlON AND GEOLO CAL ENGINEERS
Date y. 8 . 16'
10
15
o
LOG 0 F Tn r ,,0; r 3
Equipment /3ezek ,(0.4-
Elevation ex/sr. Cr. Dote <(. J. 90
-BROWN SANDY SILT (ML), soft, wet, with
rock fragments
-DARK BROWN SANDY SILT (ML), soft, wet
LIGHT GRAY BROWN SANDY CLAY (CH),
~ med. stiff, wet
Stiff @ 3.5'
_BROWN & GRAY BROWN SANDY CLAY (CL-CH),
stiff, damp, with rock fragments
BROWN & GRAY BROWN SANDY CLAY (CL-CH),
,- stiff, damp, with abundant small
sub-angular & angular rock fragments
(older colluvium - Qcol)
With occ. 3"- 8" size angular marine
volcanic greenstone rock fragments
>.~beyond 13'
(Bedrock formation not encountered)
LOG OF Terr ;0,",. ,...
Equipment Bo eN ~"L
Elevation [''';st. G,.. Dote y. 3.'p6
, BROWN SANDY SILT (ML), soft, wet, with
small rock fragments
- DARK BROWN SANDY SILT (ML), soft,
wet, wi th rock fragments
8" Boulder @ 2'
LIGHT GRAY BROWN SANDY CLAY (CH),
.... med. stiff, wet
Stiff @ 5'
Small seepage @ 3'
BROWN SANDY CLAY (CL-CH), stiff, mois4
.... with abundant small sub-angular &
angular rock fragments (older
colluvium- Qcol)
r:'XHIBIT NO. c..
P. 21 OF ~7
(Bedrock formation nmt encountered)
p~"'7""':.::-'~~:':;ll ""',--:",(....)
f. ~ 3 of il9
LOG 0 F ru,. p,",. J 3 ( Y P LA T E
885.0 r,"6",.o,. IJ/vc/, y"
r:6u,.".. . c4
, .
r
r
r
r
r
r
I
I
L
L
l
J
yr-;,
L
L
L
L
l
l
L
Shear Strength (Ibs/sq ft)
o
o
~
,f 00
olO ~
o
o
~
00
,0
iO."- /71'.*
-
, The 09 af ubsurf ce co dition!
shov n herel r appli s Onll at thE
spec fic bori gar I st pit r probE
locat on on t e date dicate ,Itma
not e repre entativ of su surfacl
cane tions a other catian and/o
othe times.
'*.r~ tl'~ ./~
~
~
Q) -
:; c:
- Q)
~ -
'0 g
:::!:v
o
~
~
u
a. ~
~ -
~
.c~ Q)
0;; -:E. a..
>-. c: 0.. E
.... Q) Q) 0
Cl Cl Cl Vl
o
Pl;:;;: 0
F.i II
! V 5
.; wo.fe,..
ley...!
: '1.J.N
'~i'Y:7"T--T~~:-',1ml l,'
-_.::.....:........_-_ - I
t/l.tcr4 7t: ~
EARTH SCIENCE CONSULTANTS r."
SOIL . rOUNDA T/ON AND GEOLO ICAL ENGINEERS
Dale y. 8. 1'6
Job No, 16 '<(S~___Ap r:
LOG OF Tul,P;" ,.
Equipment 13a.ck,,(o.Q..
Elevation .:x/sl'. Cr. Date <(. J. 96
-DARK GRAY BROWN SANDY SILT (ML), soft,
wet, with small rock fragments
(topsoil)
LIGHT GRAY BROWN SANDY CLAY (CH),
~ med. stiff, wet
5 Stiff @ 3.5'
OLIVE GREEN SERPENTINE, closely
10 111 ~ fractured, highly weathered, low
hardness (KJf-sp)
hI Harder & less weathered @ 12'
15
:rER WM3 OBSERVED
NO FREe:: OR BORItlGAT TIME
IN TEST HOWEVER,
OF lN~~~~~~R TABLE MAY
THE G OF SEEPAGE MAY BE
~~:SENT' DURING n;E WIN1F.R.
LOG 0 F Ten' ,.0,',.. if
Equipment l3oc~"".II..
Elevation l'>t/st. Gr. Date Y'" 3 ..J'if
DARK GRAY BROWN & BROWN SANDY SILT
~ (ML-CL), soft to med. stiff, wet,
with small rock fragments
Seepage @ 1.8'
Significant caving from I' to 9'
lu
LIGHT GRAY BROWN SANDY CLAY (CH),
~ st iff, wet
OLIVE GRAY GREEN SANDY CLAY (CH),
" stiff, saturated, with very small
angular serpentine rock fragments
OLIVE GREEN SERPENTINE, crushed &
" sheared, completely weathered
(zone of ancient tectonic shearing)
15
'P. 'l L oF(,7!
1, 2-EXHIBIT NO. G-
or- 1\ ~
LOG OF ron' P,'I'J S"<(.f"
8850 r;6",,,,. O/",/.
r:6"r".. C'.;f
, .
PLATE
S
, sef\"JeP
, p,w,.,soe :rllMe
l'l0 f\'.elO W,a..~f\ eQ?\l'lG ;'WC'JEf',.
~ ieSi :~1G"'iIOtl'f\ ~"e\.e ""'~
0< IN-J l'lOW"11O M,a..'1 e
i~E Gp,OIl Se'C'i~"O~E WI\'liEf',.
p,lSE O~' OUp,lNG ,
"P.E;seN
3:::T'T-:-rI,',IT 1'].). 2...- ''X}-IIBIT NO. c.. P. '2.3~C,7
EARTH SCIENCE CONSULTANTS P,b bPI~bG OF ruJ' P,'J'J '(8
SOIL . rOUNDA TlON AND GEOLO CAl ENGINEERS
88S.o T;6"~",,, /J/v/
r;6",.".. . C4
, ,
r
r
r
(
r
r
I
I
[
I
L
L
L
L
L
L
l
L
L Job Na, ? If 1.. '18 f'
Shear Strength (Ibs/sq ft)
o
o
1,0
i
<01,0
o
o
~
o
00
'Ii
00
\0
tBi1-. V71'. ..
iI.r~ tp~ Y.t1M:
$.tc-<4, 7t:'I'-
ThE log af subsur ace cc ndilion
sho Nn her in app ies ani IJ al th
spe ific bo ing or est pit pr prob
lac tion on he dale indical d, II mE
not be rep ~senlati e of s bsurfac~
con itions lather locatio s and/( r
oth rlimes,
,
o
~
~
~
., -
;; c
- .,
~ -
.- c
o 0
:::Eu
~
~
u
0. ~
~ -
.c- ~ QJ
0- ..J:. -
~ - a.
>-.Co.e
'- QJ lU 0
Cl Cl Cl V>
o
Date y. 8. ?If
LOG OF Tol'p,'f J
Equipmen t 13 a c k ..(".4-
Elevation Ex/sl'. Cr.
Do te <{. J . P If
5
-DARK GRAY BROWN SANDY SILT (ML),
soft, wet, with small rock fra~s
- GRAY,.BROWN SANDY CLAY (CH), med.
stiff, wet
-OLIVE GRAY GREEN SANDY CLAY (CH),
1$1 stiff, damp, with serpentine rock
'- fragments
OLIVE GRAY GREEN SERPENTINE, intensel]
fractured, highly to severely
weathered, low hardness (KJf-sp)
10
15
sef\"JEP
:reI'. w,.,s06 :r lIME
l'l0 fp,EIO WI' 01'. eOf',\l'lGo"WE-JER
It< iesi ;'1G"11()t\,p, ~"B\.E ""''(
O~ IN\! 'l'lOw,,-n: M"'( BE
~E op,OU seE:i?"oe WI\'liEf',.
fllSE ~~' OufI\tlG i1\E
pflEse
LOG OF Ten' p,'J' 8
Equipment I3Qc,f~"..(.
Elevation ['../s1'. G,.. Dote V' 3.j)6'
o
- GRAY BROWN SANDY CLAY (CH), soft, wet
_LIGHT GRAY BROWN SANDY CLAY (CL-CH),
med. stiff, wet, with rock fragments
... Stiff @ 1,7'
GRAY BROWN FINE GRAINED SANDSTONE,
closely fractured, highly weathered,
low hardness (KJf-ss)
Harder, less weathered @ 3.5'
5
15
P LA TE
6
r
r
r
r
r
r
I
I
L
I
L
L
L
L
L
L
l
L
L Job No, " ~Y8J' _____Ap ,
Shear Strength (Ibs/sq ft)
o
o
~
I
It
00
~
00
~
00
,0
t8.
/71'.*
*j'~ IP~ y~
t8~ '7t: 1<
The I 9 of s bsurfa e con itions
show hereir applie anly at the
speci ie barir 9 ar te t pit 0 probe
locati non th date ir ieated It may
not b repre! entative at sub urfaee
eondi ions at other I< !Cations and/or
other imes.
o
~
~
g..
., -
'5 c
- .,
~ -
.- c
a 0
::Eu
~
~
u
o..~
~ -
.c~ GJ
o:t -:s a.
>..c a. E
"- GJ GJ 0
CCCt/)
o
~
EARTH SCIENCE CONSULTANTS
SOIL' FOUNDATION AND GEOLOG CAL ENGINEERS
Date y. 8. 9'
LOG OF 7nl/';'"
Equipment /3ack ..(O~
Elevation ['x:sl'. C,.. Dote <(. J. 96
5
10
,DARK BROWN SANDY SILT (ML), soft, wet,
with small rock fragments
'BROWN SANDY CLAY (CL-CH), med. stiff,
, wet, with small rock fragments
'LIGHT GRAY BROWN SANDY CLAY (CH),
" med. stiff, wet
LIGHT OLIVE GREEN SANDY CLAY (CH),
med. stiff, wet, with small serp-
" entine rock fragments
OLIVE GRAY SERPENTINE, crushed & :!,I
sheared, very severely to completely
weathered, with slickensides (zone
on ancient tectonic shearing)
foS oeSEf\"JEO
folO Ff\EE w.-.lER :ORII'lG "'T TIME
TEsT PIT OR HoWEVER.
IN SiIG"'T1ot', . c: MAY
OF INVE W",lER T....8u- E
Tl-IE GROUND r.","GE M....y 8
RISE OF. sE ING Tl-IE WINTER.
QRESENi OUR
LOG OF 7'en' p;" /Q
Equipment 130 c,f ~ "../!.
Elevation !"";st. G,.. Dote V' 3 'P6'
15
o
'GRAY BROWN SILTY ANGULAR GRAVEL (GP),
'\ loose, wet (old road surface)
DARK BROWN SANDY CLAY (GL), soft, wet
, Small seepage @ 0.5'
LIGHT BROWN SANDY CLAY (CL-CH), med.
\ stiff, wet ,
Stiff @ 1.8', with angular sandstone
rock fragments
LIGHT BROWN FINE GRAINED SANDSTONE,
closely fractured, highly to severe 1]
weathered, low hardness, friable
(KJf-ss)
5
~, ~-~--~--- - -'J ...,
.j." ./ . -,' .'" I., .,'. c.,/
-':...:..~...'.. ~___.:....~..'..___ .L _.;~ 1.;',,,;.
15
~, <Of.:, OF' ll"l
EXHIBIT NO, C.
? 'Zt.f oF Ctn
LOG OF rut P;'J 1(10
8850 T:6,.,-o/'O /J/v/.
T:6u,.".. (;4
, .
P LA TE
7
MAJOR DMSlONS TYPICAL NAMES
I GW 'f WIll OIAOfO QU,vtU. GlAV1!L _ SAND MIX""'!!
CU."'N GUvns
Wln4 I,lfTU CI
CIl _ I G"AVEL! NOflNts . 1'00.1. Y GlAOID GUvfLS. GUvfl - lAND
=~ I G' ',,",~. MlX1UtlS
0-'
"'~ i MOIl TM.A.H lot4lf SillY Gl.AvlLS, I'OOI:LY OIADlO GtAVI!L -"'NO-
COAIU ~CTlON GIl
Z IS......GU 1'kAN GlAVlU WI11'4 IlL' IoUXTUO
Cl NO. ~ slrve SIZI 0Vft 12'1. fiNiS
Ll.l GC Q,AvtY GaAvfLS, I'OOll Y GUDlD CU,vll . SAND _
Z' CLAY,"",XnAlS
~t;
a:: 3 sw .
ClI~ CLlAN '-"NOS . . WILL GlAotD SANDS. GlAvtllY SANDI
'" W,TH llnu 01 ,
Ll.l~ SANDS NO'INfS .
CIlz S. . . l'OalY GaAotO SANDS, GaAvtlLY SANDS
a::l ,
~- MOIl not...,.. HALl'
8~ co.t.l$l AACTlON '" SILf'Y Lt.NOS, I'OOI\,Y GlACIO SAND. SiLl
IS SMIIoUll n4AN SANOS ""'1 TH I-- MIXMfS
NO. .. 51"'1 SIZI 0Vtt 11'1& f'NIS
SC CLAYfY SANDS, 1'001:\,'1" GUote SAND. cu....
MllUURIS
O')~ INQGANIC Illn AND ....UY 'IN( SANDS, 100:
ilL 'LOU:. SILN 01 CUyty "NI SANDS, 01
..J- Cl.AvtY llln WITH SLIGHT IlI.ASnON
-~ 'ILTS AND CLAYS ~ INaGANIC CLA Y1 0' lOW TO WDtUM I'US nCITY.
0_
CIlz CL GlAvlLLY Cl.A'n. SAND"I" CLAY1, SilTY CLAVS,
C~ \,IQ\AO L1.....T LISS 1MAN SO UAN Cv.yS
I
OL 1III OIGAN'C CLAYS AND OIGANIC SILty CUY1 Of'
Ll.l~ 1111 lOW'lASTlCITY
Z.
-i
~~ IlH IHaGANIC Slln, MlCACIOUS 01 tKATO/ro4ot.OOUS
FIN! SANC"f 01 IILI'Y IOnJ. !LA$T1C SILT'S
~ SILTS AND CLAYS ~
Ll.l~ CH tHaGANIC Cl.AY1 Of HIGH 'LASnCITY.
Zi LIQUID Ll""r GllATII ?MAN.so '....r Cl.AY1
ii:_ ~ OI:GANIC C1.AY1 01 MlOfUM ro HIGH I"lASTlON.
~ OH OIGANIC IlL T'S
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PI f;::::: I'tA I ....NO Ofl1fl HIGHL'( OIGANIC 100U
I--
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
!.UIPt...E O€!IGHATlON
.'U..41o",,".4" 1..,1.
181 I..U.. .. Cl...HI..,I... ,..,1.
STRENGTH TESTS
v'-/'-/'-/""',.~
.......N! IH!..... TUT
, .,..111
L" L......,..,
UNCON'IN(D CO.....'UISION USI
1000 (:IO.OJ r
r r
Dlucr IMfA. Irsl 1000 (30.0J IX x X XI
CD . C....",..., - D. " r r I- , 'I
M.I..... C....., "'" :.:: f'"
S"... N....I ,. Sh... '1.... ('1')
III....XI....L COMPlrs510N nsy
UU . u........ltll.,.II - U..II,.lfl.1I
cu . C.....ll..,.4 . U.....I....
cO .. C..".114.,.4 " 0.el...4
1/2 0...1.... 5,.... (,.f)
Me",.... C...,..., .1,.. I." (..)
C...'I"I.., Su... - 0'') ("f)
KEY TO TEST DATA
E={~:C~=~~;~il = ".':=':.
2--
l?XHIBIT NO. c..
'P. 2-S" of (p 7
p, to?
Date V'B- pt!
o
SOIL CLASSIFICATION
88, B r/t, ""0"
T/6lJ.ro/l,
,
CHART
/Jlvt/.
PLA TE
8
EARTH SCIENCE CONSULTANTS
SOIL . FOUNDATION AND GEOLO CAL ENGINEERS
ob Na, Jo 2.'187
CA
rUBC
1
1
I
I
I
1
I
VERY HIGH I
..
--------~130
1
I
1
I
1
1
1
--------190
I
I
I
J
I
I
--------j50
LOW I
1
I
2 ------------ , I
"
VERY LOW :
TI~~{T__Tr~;"!'T fTO
----f:-~~ DF'
EARTH SCIENCE CONSULTANTS
SOIL' FOUNDATION AND GEOLOGI L ENGINEERS
r
r
r
[
r
r
(
I
I
I
L
L
L
L
L
L
l
l
30
28
26
24
22
20
c: 18
OJ
()
'-
OJ
c..
16
c:
.!:!
'"
c: 14
0
0-
x
UJ
0 12
0
I-
10
8
6
4
o
EXPANSION INDEX TEST (UBC 29-2)
(411 diameTer x I" Thick specimen" 144 psf surcharg e ; 24 hr saTuroTion)
(90 percenT relaTive compacTion aT opTimum moiSTure per ASTM 1.557J
Symbol
Initial
Moisture
EXPANSION
INDEX
/37 (V,,) #''y9
Final
Moisture
Boring / DepTh
.
P,'f l(@ if'
37.0%
1/.6"~
(EXPANSION INDEX) CLASSIFICATION
UNIFORM BUILDING CODe
TABLE NO. 29-<:-CLASSIACATlON OF EXPANSIVE SOIL
EXPANSION INOEX
POTEHnAL EXPANSION
Very low
Low
Medium
High
Very high
Q.20
21.50
51,90
91.130
Above l30
{FHA/HUb CLASSIFICATION
I
,
CRITICAL
,
I
I
t
I
t
HIGH
I
I
t
----
I
I
MODERATe:.
,
I
t
LO'W
,
I
100 144
,
200
.
300
,
500
400
600
Confining Pressure (Pounds Per Square FOOT)
'"2--
C-
EXPANSION TEST RESULTS
88S Ii T;6tuo" ,0/,,/.
7;{,,,,...,, I C4
PLATE
9
JobNo 91 2.y'89
Date 'f.8.~,{
......
<0
:z:
,
DOI.Jl,SLOPE
RECTION
" .
/0 ;4{,,, .
~ GRADE BEAM
/'
3 #5 OR 2 #6 BARS
TOP AND BOTTOM
l'
/13 TIES
(8" x 8"
@ '''cc
...
6 tiS OR 4 tl6
BARS, EXTEND
TO 'TOP OF
GRADE BEAM
((iro.'/.A. 00)
18"
M:,..
TIES .# 3@ 7r.."
(7" X 13")
-4" VOID FORM
,
18" DIA. DRILLED P1ER " 20 Deep
I)
\
/
24" BENDS AT ALL
CORNERS & INTERSECTIONS
I -
- LAP SPLICE
~tf" FOR IS BARS
'I~" FOR #6 BARS
-
PIERS
10' CC
GRADE
BEAM -
TYPICAL FOUNDATION LAYOUT
1. RECOMMENDED MINIMUM FOUNDATION DETAILS FROM THE
CONCEPTUAL GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STANDPOINT.
HOWEVER, THE ACTUAL FOUNDATION DETAILS WILL HAVE
TO BE DETERMINED BY THE STRUCTURAL CIVIL ENGINEER.*
2. THE FOUNDATION SHOULD ALSO BE DESIGNED TO RESIST THE
MINIMUM LOADS AS REQUIRED BY THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE.
). REINF. STEEL SHOULD BE #40 GRADE, ASTM A615-40 OR BETTER,
4S ..,tJfett'.
4. WOOD JOIST FLOORS SHOULD BE USED.
5. SOIL ENGINEER SHOULD PERIODICALLY OBSERVE DRILLING OF PIER HOLES,
6. FOUNDATION STRUCTURAL ENGINEER SHOULD OBSERVE STEEL & FORMS
PRIOR TO CONCRETE POURS.
* Unless approved by geotechnical engineer
consul ta tion
with supplemental
EXHIBIT NO. C
f. 1.7 oF~1
FOUNDATION DETAILS
8Sf 8 r;6'uolt 01..<1'.
r/l1<utJ" C"A
,
/0
fI,
EARTH SCIENCE CONSULTANTS
501L . fOUNo",nON "'NO GEOLOG "'L ENGINEERS
PLATE
Date: V. 8. p,{
Job No.9' 2. <f8 9
r
r
[
[
r
r
I
I
L
L
[
L
L
L
L
l
l
l
L
A P PEN D I X 1
SITE DRAINAGE
Of great importance is providing adequate surface and subsurface
drainage as most hillside structures are generally prone to
drainage problems. Also, all site drainage waters should be
handled and discharged in a legal, prudent, reasonable and proper
manner so as not to create a nuisance, risk or hazard to this
property or adjoining properties.
We generally recommend that structures be equipped with roof
gutters and downspouts. All runoff waters including all
downspouts, patio, parking, and driveway drainage, and all other
drainage should be collected in closed pipes with periodic
cleanouts and/or concrete-lined V-ditches and/or catch basins and
discharged into the legal approved area storm drain system.
If the above is not totally practical or feasible, then all site
drainage waters should be discharged well away from all building
and foundation areas. Site drainage waters should be discharged
and well dispersed in such a manner so as not to result in
iocalized erosion or sloughing. Care should be used so that
drainage waters are not concentrated and discharged on downslope
or adjacent properties. site drainage waters should be we!,l
dispersed in as natural a manner as possible and should not be
discharged in a concentrated manner if a legally-approved storm
drain system is not present.
Fill areas should be, graded so that storm water does not flow over
fill slopes.
Cut slopes should be provided with concrete-lined V-ditches about
5 feet above the top of the cut slope so as to prevent excessive
storm waters from flowing over cut slopes.
p""'!:n-rT~-ri""':l "7...,,'--". -t.,
l.!J~L~_...;......''':;'' _1 l"iJ.
1-1
APPENDIX
EXHIBIT NO. C-
f;) ., ft rv: 1_"
1
SITE
DRAINAGE
D "'7\ ^C J 10
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
I
I
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
l
l
L
It should be noted that moisture is usually present under most
hillside structures as surface and subsurface waters flow from the
area above the structure. Therefore, to reduce the amount of
moisture under a structure located on a hillside or at the base of
a hillside or higher area, it is usually required to construct
deeper subdrains and concrete-lined V-ditches immediately above
the structure, as shown on the Subdrain Details part of this
report.
During the next several years we believe it would be appropriate
to periodically monitor the site drainage to observe drainage
trends, and additional drainage measures may be required depending
upon the actual site drainage and land performance.
We also recommend that the attorney for the developer and owner be
consulted to determine the legal manner of discharging drainage at
this site. It should be noted that improperly discharged
concentrated drainage may be a source of liability and litigation
between adjacent property owners.
In those areas where legal area storm drain systems may not be
present, then site drainage waters should be handled in a
reasonable and prudent manner in the spirit of "Keys vs. Romley"
(64 Cal 2nd 396, 1966) and the associated "rule of reasonable use"
pertaining to surface waters as provided in the next three'
paragraphs.
"It is encumhent on every person to take reasonable care in using
his property to avoid injury to adjacent property through the flow
of surface waters, and any person so threatened with injury has
the equal duty to take reasonable precautions to avoid or reduce
actual or potential injury. Though failure to exercise reasonable
care may result in liability by an upper to a lower landowner,
where the actions of both are reasonable, necessary, and generally
in accord with reasonable care, the injury must necessarily be
borne by the upper landowner who changes a natural system of
drainage."
~. 7J ot:: Il']
'l...--
1-2
EXHIBIT NO. c
.f- t.~ OF (P7
TI;=G====-~~ =._-;':).
r
r
r
f
r
r
r
I
I
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
l
l
L
"In an action to recover damages for the discharge of surface
waters from adjoining land, the question of reasonableness of
conduct is not related solely to the actor's irtterest, however
legitimate; it must be weighed against the effect of the act on
others. The issue of reasonableness is a question of fact to be
determined by considering all relevant circumstances, including
the amount of harm caused, the foreseability of the harm that
results, and the purpose or motive with which the possessor
acted."
"In land development problems, it is proper to consider whether
the utility of the possessor's use of his land outweighs the
gravity of the harm that results from his alteration of the flow
of surface waters. Where the weight is on the side of the one who
alters a natural watercourse, he has acted reasonably and without
liability; where the harm to the lower landowner is unreasonably
severe, then the economic costs incident to the expulsion of
surface waters must be borne by the upper owner. But if both
parties conducted themselves reasonably, then the courts are bound
by the old civil law rule."
The old civil law rule...is that "a person who interferes with the
natural flow of surface waters so as to cause an invasion of
another's interests in the use and enjoyment of his land is
subject to liability to the other."
Also, site drainage should be provided as necessary and maintained
and repaired as necessary so as to be in accordance with
California common and statute law and the more recent
interpretations of t,he "rule of reasonable use" pertaining to
surface waters, including: "Martinson vs. Hughey" (199 Cal App
3rd 318, 1988), "Weaver vs. Bishop" (206 Cal App 3rd 1351, 1988),
"Aalso vs. Leslie Salt" (218 Cal App 3rd 417, 1990), and
California civil Code Sections 1714 and 3479. "The old civil law
rule, under which a landowner was liable for any harm caused to
neighboring owners by an alteration in the flow of surface waters
~..~----- -?
J:." '" -:,~'1'"\""'-. ~
.1..:'.'_4>.0__..._.":"-.1.,,~ .!.- ;J.
f,i2...cF t1<:l
1-3
EXHIBIT NO. c...
P. 3ocF~7
r
r
r
[
r
r
(
I
I
I
L
L
L
L
L
l
l
L
L
across his or her land has been qualified by the rule of
reasonable use. Under this rule, an owner modifying the flow of
surface waters can successfully defend a claim for damages showing
that his conduct was reasonable and that of the plaintiff was
unreasonable."
If good retaining wall performance is desired, such as in
habitable portions of the structure, then such retaining walls
should be very carefully waterproofed.
We recommend that provision be made for the relief of hydrostatic
pressure that might build up beneath any concrete floor slabs.
Adequate gravity outlets or weep holes should be provided so that
all portions of the drain rock beneath the concrete floor slabs
may drain. However, such weep holes or drain outlets should be
carefully located in such a manner that water will not flow inward
to beneath the floor slabs.
It should be realized that considerable normal runoff water from
prolonged and intense rainfall flows along the surface of the
ground. However, a significant amount of water may percolate
through the upper portions of the porous topsoil materials, then
flow along the surface of impervious soil layers or along the
surface of the bedrock because the bedrock is much more dense and
compact than the above soil materials. Furthermore, a small
amount of water may infiltrate through the various joints ,and
cracks within the underlying bedrock materials. Therefore, our
usual recommendation on hillside and steeper slope construction is
to build in conformity with the existing hillside grades and not
to excavate or cut into the various soil layers and through the
soil/rock interface into the underlying bedrock materials. Such
excavating penetrates and therefore intercepts natural drainage
paths, resulting in water and moisture falling from the cut.
However, due to functional and aesthetic reasons or requirements,
there are many times when such cutting into the natural earth-soil
and rock materials is required. However, it should be realized
that drainage waters will most likely be present in such areas and
will have to be either accepted and/or dealt with as required.
"C.'~==::=-.::.::-: :",-::), Z- 1-4
'P. 73 bZ:; ;j9
EXHIBIT NO, G
- p. ~l OF ~7
r
r
r
[
r
r
[
r
I
I
L
L
L
l
L
L
l
l
L
The building designer and contractor should use special care with
respect to drainage considerations if the site development results
in cutting or excavating the soil or rock materials. Such cutting
may cut through and intercept natural drainage and seepage paths
and may result in considerable drainage waters flowing toward,
into or beneath the structure. Also, excavating in areas of level
or gentle slope may result in adjacent water seeping into the
ground and flowing towards the excavation.
Generally, under no circumstances should crawl space areas be
excavated below the adjacent site grades (such as to provide
adequate clearance for wood joist floors) unless the building
designer and contractor very carefully consider and provide for
drainage waters that might flow into and be trapped in the
foundation crawl space area and also consider potential higher
humidity and very good cross-ventilation.
The designer of the proposed structure and the contractor should
make sure that sufficient weeps or drainage holes are present
within the foundation elements inside the structure so that if
drainage waters should flow or infiltrate into the foundation
area, then they can easily flow out and away from the structure
and not pond or slowly seep into habitable areas.
The above site drainage recommendations are general in nature and
should be carried out by the house designer, contractor, owner,
and future owners to the fullest possible extent. However, from
many years of soil engineering experience within Northern
California, we have found that water and moisture below most
structures is relativley common. Therefore, we suggest that if
the owner desires assurance with respect to site drainage, an
expert in the field of hydrology and drainage should be retained
to prepare specific recommendations.
-...--'------~ ~ --,~ Z--
,,'..., ;' ',1 '_. ."\
.--.-...;-.-.......:....0-..:...:. .J..: ...J.
~, 11./ DF 11'1
EXHIBIT NO. C.
,? 32. OF (,7
1-5
r
r
r
[
r
r
r
I
I
l
L
l
L
L
L
l
l
l
L
A P PEN D I X 2
SUBDRAlN DETAIl
LINED V-DITCH
12" COMPACTED SOIL CAP
WHERE THIN SUBDRAIN SUBSTITUTES
ARE REQUIRED, USE MIRAFI v.t.vo
MIRADRAIN 6000 OR EQUIVALENT .6"
12"
RETAINING WALL OR
FOUNDATION ELEMENT
WALL SUBDRAIN
vc,
VL>
4" DIAMETER PERFORATEI
PIPE. HOLES DOWN. SLOI
2% MINIMUM TO DRAIN Wl
CLEANOUTS
DRAIN ROCK,
3/4" TO 1~",
& HARD
USE FILTER CLOTH OVER
DRAIN ROCK OR USE CLASS 2 1
PERMEABLE MATERIAL INSTEAD
OF DRAIN ROCK (Cal Trans 68-1.025)
ALL SUBDRAIN & V-DITCH WATERS
FILTER CLOTH TO BE MIRAFI SHOULD BE COLLECTED IN CLOSED
SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE FABRIC PIPES WITH PERIODIC CLEANOUTS
& DISCHARGED INTO THE AREA STORM
140N OR EQUIVALENT DRAIN SYSTEM
.....
* Plastic pipe ASTM-F-810 2,000 lb. cru
for average light residential use
12" COMPACTED
SOIL CAP
'--
DRAIN ROCK
'Va?
<1\7
<lv
A
b
USE FILTE~ CLOTH AROUND DRAIN ROCK
OR USE CLASS 2 PERMEABL~ MATERIAL
INSTEAD OF DRAIN ROCK
DEPTH VARIES - TO BE DETERMINED
BY THE SOIL ENGINEER DURING
CONSTRUCTION
TRENCH
SUBDRAIN
6
'V~ I{
....
11."
** For deeper
use SDR-35
**
4" DR 6" DIAMETER PERFORATED*
PIPE, HOLES DOWN, SLOPE 2%
12"-18" MINIMUM TO DRAIN WITH CLEANOUTS
fills, higher walls, & larger residential projects,
heavy duty plastic pipe, ASTM 03034
4'
SUBDRAIN DETAILS
APPENDIX
EXHIBIT NO. c...
P.33 OE= C4,
2
~S='~-~:~=.--=/lj ?-~.J.~
_________ 'P.? ') ~ IIC,
r
r
r
[
r
r
(
I
l
[
[
L
.'~_. "~'
L
L
L
L
l
L
L
A P PEN D I X 3
WALL SURCHARGE DE'! LS
LINE LOAD QL
FOOTING
OF ADJACENT
STRUCTURE
PROPOSED NEW
RETAINING WALL
PH RESULTANT
RESULTANT FORCE (PH) DUE TO LINE LOAD (QL)
PH = 0.39 QL
WALL SURCHARGE DETAILS A P PEN D I X 3
:,::c:::::::::.:r[' iTJ. 2- EXHIBIT NO. c..
,______________ fl. 7f, ~ lti..______ ~~.1l_cx::___~7
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
I
l
l
L
L
L
L
L
L
l
l
L
A P PEN D I X 3.1
HOUSE APPENDAGES
.<
When minor appendages are required adjacent to the house
construction, such appendages should be structurally separated
,from the house with a 1/2-inch flexible joint or placed upon
foundations similar to the house foundations and designed to
resist expansive soil effects. If shallow foundation appendages
are attached to the house foundation, then, with time, such
appendages could experience uplift and settlement due to expansive
soil effects and could cause some stress to the main house
foundations.
.,"
HOUSE
APPENDAGES A P PEN D I X
3.1
':-:---:-"-':--:-'-;1,,:; 1- EXHIBITNO. G
"'---~..:.....-_~--_... ..:.. J _.
p, 77 ~ Wi 1>. 35"" OF (07
r
r
r
[
r
r
I
I
l
L
L
1
L
L
L
L
l
L
L
A P PEN D I X 4
FILL PLACEMENT
All fill placement should be prepared and placed in accordance
with Chapter 70 of the Uniform Building Code, and in accordance
with the requirements as shown on Appendix 4.1 and as described in
Appendix H of this report. All fill materials should be moisture-
conditioned to at least 3 oercent wet of optimum moisture content
at the time of fill placement due to the presence of expansive
soil materials.
It should be noted that even well-compacted fill, with time, may
settle up to 1/2 percent to 1 percent of its total thickness.
~=-: :-===',=? 1-;). (."
f. 7'8 of tl9
APPENDIX
EXHIBIT NO. C.
'P. 3~ DF feJ'J
4
FILL
PLACEMENT
r
r
r
r
r
r
I
l
I
l
L
L
L
L
l
l
l
l
L
A P PEN D I X 4.1
HILLSIDE FILL DETl S
ALL FILL SLOPES SHOULD BE I.JELL COMPACTED AND
LOOSE ~~TERIALS REMOVED. SLOPES SHOULD BE
PLANTED AND GOOD GRASS COVER ESTABLISHED
PRIOR TO WINTER RAINS
FILTER CLOTH, NIRAFI
1" HIN. /SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE FABRIC
/_ ,OR EQUIVALENT
3/." TO 1 1/2' 3' NIN.. HIGHER DRAINS
DRAIN ROCK HAT BE REQUIRED BY
SOIL ElfGIHEER
." OIA. PERFORATED HEAVY
DUTY PlASTIC PIPE. HOlES
DOlIN, SLOPE 2S TO DRAIN TO
DAYLIGHT. SOR-3S PIPE. ASTN
03034. .' OF DRAIN ROCK BELOW
PIPE. 6- OIA. ;IPE FOR lARGER
FILLS.
2' HIN.
YYPICAL KEY SUBDRAIH
SLOPE TOP OF FILL
INWARD AT LEAST 2% *
~ 2%
~
-
LEVEL BENCHES EXCAVATED INTO
BEDROCK OR FIRM STABLE MATERIALS
AS DETERMINED BY SOIL ENGINEER
APPROVED FILL MATERIAL FREE OF ORGANIC
MATTER SHOULD BE MOISTURE CONDITIONED
AS REQUIRED, SPREAD IN THIN LIFTS AND
COMPACTED l.JITH A SHEEPSFOOT COMPACTOR
TO 90% COMPACTION, ASTM DlSS7-70T(C)
2:1 MAX. SLOPE,
WALLS SHOULD BE
IF NECESSARY IN
RETAINING
USED AT TO,
STEEP AREA
TOE OF FILL SLOPE
SHOULD "CATCH" IN
BEDROCK OR FIRM
STABLE MATERIALS !
DETERMINED BY SOIl
ENGINEER
TOPSOILS
- ' AND SLOPE.
DEBRIS
NOTE: SPECIFIC HILLSIDE FILL DETAILS WILL BE DETERMINED BY THE SOIL
ENGINEER DURING CONSTRUCTION INCLUDING KEYWAY OBSERVATION AND
PERIODIC COMPACTION TESTS.
* GENERALLY SLOPE FILL INWARD AT LEAST 2% SO TO FLOW INTO SITE STORM
DRAIN SYSTEM AND NOT OVER FILL SLOPE. A SITE GRADING AND DRAINAGE
P.LAN SHOULD BE PREPARED SHOWING SLOPING OF FILL SURFACE TO DRAIN.
ALsO, DRAINAGE SHOULD FLOW AWAY FROM STRUCTURE AND IMPROVEMENTS
AND NOT BE ALLOWED TO POND.
,
HILLSIDE FILL DETAILS
'-"'~-----., --. -, C',-'" "7
. ,. - '-'
..:......1,_.__.__ ";",~~'._ ~ ,'- j ~ f
~, 'f:t OP ilif
APPENDIX
EXHIBIT NO. c..
? 37 oF (07
4.1
r
r
r
(
r
r
(
I
I
L
L
L
L
L
L
l
l
L
L
ALL FILL SW"lLD BE i.JELL COMPACTED AND
LOOSE NATERIALS RE. \fED. BARREN AREAS SHOULD BE
PLANTED AND GOOD GRASS COVER ESTABLISHED
PRIOR TO WINTER RAINS
TOPSOILS
AND SLOPE
DEBRIS J
SUBDRAIN MAY BE REQUIRED I
IN SEEPAGE ZONES AND RAYINE, ARE.
I I
HILLSIDE FILL DETAILS WILL BE DETERMINED BY THE SOIL
DURING CONSTRUCTION INCLUDING KEYWAY OBSERVATION AND
COMPACTION TESTS. I I
I I
I I
I ,
DRILLED I I
PIER:....>rl I
1__1
fiLTER: CLOTH, Mimi
" HIN. /sueSURfACE DRAINAGE fABRIC
/_ OA EQUIVALENT
3/." TO I 1/2" 3' KIN.. HIGlfEA O....INS
DRAIN ROCK HAY' BE REQUIRED SY
SOIL EKGINEEA
..- 011.. PERfORATED HEAYT
DUTY PlASTIC PIPE. HOlES
DOWN, SLOPE 21 TO DRAIN TO
DAYLIGHT, 5OA-35 PIPE, ASTM
DJOJ4. ... or ORA I H ROCK BELOW
PIPE. '-DIA. PIPE fOR l.JJl:GtR
fILLS.
2' HIN.
TYPICAL t:::EY SUBDRAIM
-
SLOPE TOP OF FILL
INWARD AT LEAST 2% *
~ 2%
LEVEL BENCHES EXCAVATED INTO
BEDROCK OR FIRM STABLE MATERIALS
AS DETERMINED BY SOIL ENGINEER
APPROVED FILL MATERIAL FREE OF ORGANIC
MATTER SHOULD BE MOISTUkE CONDITIONED
AS REQUIRED, SPREAD IN THIN LIFTS AND
COMPACTED WITH A SHEEPSF001 COMPACTOR
TO 90% COMPACTION, ASTM D1557-70T(C)
NOTE:
SPECIFIC
ENGINEER
PERIODIC
ENGINEERED
RETAINING WALL
ON DRILLED PIERS
SUBDRAIN
. GENERALLY SLOPE fILL INWARO AT LEAST 21 SO TO fLOW INTO SITE STORM
DRAIN SYSTEM AND NOT OVER fILL SLOPE. A SITE GRADING AND DRAINAGE
pLAN SHOULD BE PREPARED SHOWING SLOPING Of fILL SURfACE TO DRAIN.
ALsO. DRAINAGE SHOULD fLOW AWAY fROM STRUCTURE AND IMPROVEMENTS
AND NOT BE ALLOWED TO POND.
HILLSIDE FILL DETAILS
~'::~=====;~~7 ='-i~'~). Z,
'? 80 Or Il'1
APPENDIX 4.1
l-'.I,JIIBIT NO" C.
P. Sc? OF (g:J.__
r
r
r
r
r
r
(
I
I
L
L
1
..t
L
L
L
l
l
L
L
A P PEN D I X 4.2
CUT AND FILL SLOPE MAINTENANCE
It should be noted that with time most cut and fill slopes,
regardless of precautions taken, experience some erosion, raveling
and sloughing. Therefore, cut and fill slope maintenance should
be considered a part of hillside construction where cut and fill
slopes are present, and some periodic cut and fill slope repair
and maintenance should usually be anticip~ted by the owner in the
years ahead.
The frequency and amount of slope maintenance is generally greater
where the slopes are steeper and where the rainfall is heavier.
CUT AND FILL APPENDIX 4 ~
SLOPE MAINTENANCE .~
T'\"":T~-"",i'";1 '-7.0 '2.- vyrnBIT ~TO C
_:-J_......______._'"' .i ~ .~.. '4.
r. gt Of l\C( 'P. 39 or: ftJ7
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
I
I
I
L
L
";~, ;
L
L
l
L
l
l
L
A P PEN D I X 4.3
EXISTING OLDER CUT/FILL SLOPE MAINTENANCE
It should be noted that with time most cut and fill slopes,
regardless of precautions taken, experience some erosion, raveling
and sloughing. Therefore, cut and fill slope maintenance should
be considered a part of hillside construction where cut and fill
slopes are present, and some periodic cut and fill slope repair
.. and maintenance should usually be anticip~ted by the owner in the
years ahead.
The frequency and amount of slope maintenance is generally greater
where the slopes are steeper and where the rainfall is heavier.
EXISTING CUT-FILL
SLOPE MAINTENANCE
APPENDIX
4.3
,<Cc::J"~'-i'i' ,,-:, '2- EXHIBIT NO, C-
---;P:-~?~-D~ Il'q 7>.C/~ N::. , ,,-,
r
r
r
[
[
r
[
I
I
I
L
L
L
L
L
L
l
l
L
A P PEN D I X 5
EFFECT UPON ADJACENT LAND
During construction, the contractor should use considerable care
and prudence so as not to undermine or damage any of the
neighboring properties or adjacent structures.
In California, the California civil Code provides for the rights
as well as the responsibilities for those who wish to develop
their properties by excavating. There are also rights as well as
obligations of neighboring property owners. In Appendix B, we
have provided a copy of Section 832 of the current California
Civil Code.
EFFECT UPON
ADJACENT LAND A P PEN D I X
~----....-~---- ~ -~ 2-- c..
l:;~~c~___~'~'.i. i :)..,.. EXHIBIT NO.
f. ~3 oV (l'1 . ? 41 oF fQ7
5
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
(
I
I
L
L
L
L
L
L
l
l
L
A P PEN D I X 6
CONSTRUCTION SAFETY
In order to construct foundations, retaining walls, subdrains,
fill keyways, etc., it is usually required to excavate temporary
construction slopes during the construction process. During
construction, the contractor should take appropriate care to
provide safe construction slopes so as not to endanger the workmen
who will be performing the work or others nearby, including
children who might be passing by or who are attracted by the work.
Therefore, all construction slopes and construction activities
should be carried out in accordance with accepted, safe, and
prudent procedures, and also in accordance with the State of
California construction Safety Orders and O.S.H.A. requirements.
The contractor, and not the engineer, shall be responsible for the
means, methods, techniques and sequence of construction. The
contractor shall also be solely responsible for all safety
programs and procedures during construction.
The contractor shall provide adequate shoring and bracing of the
structure, cuts, and excavations as required during construction,
and shall maintain the shoring and bracing until the new permanent
structure can provide adequate vertical and lateral support for
the soils, bedrock and structures.
APPENDIX
:u______----,-, -:--"',2- EXHIBIT NO c..
hh----i:-r;Li~;../JQ ~ tl7_rl:. (",
6
CONSTRUCTION
SAFETY
f'
r
r.
[
r;
r
[
I
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
l
l
l
L
",'
i:,
A P PEN 0 I X 7.1
WIND LOADING
It should be noted that the site is situated in a location that is
exposed to heavy winds. Therefore, while it is not within our
scope of work, we would still like to point out to the house
designer and structural civil engineer the importance of designing
and detailing and constructing the structure to resist heavy wind
load effects. The structure and the roof should be carefully
designed and constructed with adequate tie-downs, and especially
roof tie-downs.
: ,~
WIND
LOAD I NG A P PEN D I X
T:==-:==-:,:='~' 21:), Z- EXH-1BIT f'T2:,. ~
p. ~c i"\~ 1IC4 .LL...:l~ V\- _-''2
7.1
r
r
r
r
r
r
i.' .,.~,
I
I
I
I
L
L
L
L
L
L
l
l
L
A P PEN D I X 8
LAND MAINTENANCE
I' "
Good periodic land maintenance should be performed as required.
All surface and subsurface waters and facilities should be
controlled and maintained to the fullest possible extent. Surface
sloughing, sliding or excessive erosion, should it occur, should
be promptly repaired as required.
~.
It should be realized that just as a car and a house need periodic
care and maintenance, so does the land which is subject to the
continuing or intermittent natural forces of rain, gravity and
earthquakes. At almost all sites, topsoils and surficial soils
are especially in need of periodic maintenance.
In California, apparently a possessor of land is legally obligated
to reasonably maintain his land with respect to both man-caused
hazards and natural hazards so as not to endanger neighboring
properties. Additional details are presented in Appendix N.
provisions should be made for adequate post-construction erosion
control, and the "Manual of Standards for Erosion and Sediment
Control Measures" published by the Association of Bay Area
Governments (AGAG) should be followed and adhered to as
appropriate.
Troublesome slide zones may be repaired in a manner similar to
that illustrated on the Earth Buttress Details part of this
report, or by other approved methods.
Generally, it takes a few years plus passing through at least one
wet winter for post-construction drainage and erosion trends to be
established. Therefore, it may be required in the future to
provide additional or supplemental drainage and land improvements,
depending upon actual post-construction performance.
LAND
APPENDIX
j7':......r-:.---,---,-.l '"" -- -I 2.-- VT3TBI'I' NO C.
-..:.,-~----- . ~, -"-_ LA-i.u:, ,
f. ~ or;. Uq ~ LJ.!J H:- 1_-'
8
MAINTENANCE
r
r
r
[
r
r
-'.-."''''
[
[
L
L
t
.L '
:1~~-,. n':."',
'i'L"<
L
l
l
l
L
L
EARTH BUTTRESS DETAI'-
FILTER CLOTH. HIRATI
l' MIN. /SUBSURFACE ORAINAGE FABRIC
/_ OR EQUIVALENT
)/4" TO 1 1/2. )' MIH.. HIGHER OAAIHS
DRAIN ROC); KAY BE REQUIRED BY
SOIL ENGINEER
... OIA. PERFORATED HEAVY
DUTY PLASTIC PIPE, HOlES
OOWN. SLOPE 21 TO DRAIN TO
DAYLIGHT. SOR-)S PIPE. ASTH
0303". .... Of DRAIN ROCK BElOW
PIPE. 6" DIA. PIPE Faa LAAGER
fILL.S.
2' MIN.
'1 T , I C A L
. ( ,
SUB ORA I N
DRAINAGE BENCH,
INWARD
ALL FILL SLOPES SHOULD BE WELL
COMPACTED AND LOOSE MATERIALS
REMOVED. SLOPES SHOULD BE PLANTED
AND GOOD GRASS COVER ESTABLISHED
PRIOR TO WINTER RAINS
COMPACTED EARTH HUTTRESS
COMPACTED TO 90% COMPACTION, ASTM
D1557-70T(C). IF ECONOMICALLY
FEASIBLE BUTTRESS MATERIALS SHOULD
HAVE A PLASTICITY INDEX LESS THAN 1~
FOR SMALLER SLIDES CAREFULLY PLACED
RIP-RAP MAY BE USED
.~ 2:1 MAX. SLOPE, RETAINING WALl
~ SHOULD BE USED AT TOE IF
~ NECESSARY IN STEEP AREAS
~"-....Jl
TOE OF FILL SLOPE
SHOULD "CATCH" IN
BEDROCK OR FIRM
STABLE MATERIALS
SUBDRAIN - 3/4" to 1%"
DRAIN ROCK, 4" DIAMETER
PLASTIC PIPE,
HOLES DOWN, SLOPED 2% TO
DRAIN WITH CLEANOUTS
LEVEL BENCHES EXCAVATED
INTO BEDROCK OR FIRM
STABLE MATERIALS
--.
i
KEYWAY
SUBDRAIN
1.
SPECIFIC EARTH BUTTRESS SLIDE REPAIR DETAILS WILL
BE DETERMINED BY THE SOIL ENGINEER DURING CONSTRUCTION.
V-DITCH AND SUBDRAIN WATERS SHOULD BE COLLECTED IN
CLOSED PIPES WITH PERIODIC CLEANOUTS AND DISCHARGED
INTO THE AREA STORM DRAIN SYSTEM.
2.
8.1
APPENDIX
=~====_:~n~ =''-~~'' L- EXHmIT NO. c..
p, 87~ -~~__ r. t.I5" OF lo7
EARTH BUI I~SS DETAILS
r
r
r
[
[
r
[
I
[
I
L
L
L
L
L
L
l
L
L
A P PEN 0 I X 9
LIMITATIONS
We have endeavored to provide our best professional judgment and
opinion based upon engineering and geological education and
experience within the authorized scope of work. However, it must
be realized that there is an inherent and assumed risk in all
hillside construction. Also, subsurface conditions may vary from
those observed at the surface or exposed in subsurface
explorations, or conditions may change with time due to natural or
man-caused effects. Therefore, there can be no guarantee or
warranty, either expressed or implied, of the stability or
performance of this or any hillside site.
It should be realized that landsliding, mudflows and erosion are
continuing natural processes which gradually wear away land forms
and hills. The topsoil, subsoil and upper portion of the very
highly weathered bedrock can be susceptible to sliding, mudflow
and erosion, even on stable sites. Such inherent hillside slope
risks may be present during periods of intense and prolonged
rainfall which occasionally occur in Northern California, and/or
during earthquake vibrations. Therefore, it must be realized that
occasional unpredictable surface sliding and mudflowing and
erosion of the topsoil, subsoil and upper portion of the very
highly weathered bedrock materials have to be accepted as
irreducible risks and hazards of building upon or near the base of
any hillside or any steeper slope area throughout Northern
California and the Greater Bay Area.
Our scope of work is specifically limited to geotechnical
engineering considerations which are the limits of our field of
specialty practice. In this report, where we have provided
comments regarding other fields of practice such as structural,
drainage and landscaping considerations, these comments have been
made only to alert the client as to the importance of these
related fields, and the client should obtain advice from the
appropriate design professionals who specialize in these related
fields for more specific review and recommendations as required.
D- ;:-r''''._~'.~ "-,j --. -,. -, ,.,
. ,~
--'~"--:P~g~ ;;F' '1/'1
APPENDIX
EXHIBIT NO. C
1) cJ/. I'Ir:.L...~
9
LIMITATIONS
r
r
r
f
r
{
[
(
l
[
L
L
l
L
L
l
l
l
L
A P PEN D I X 10
CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION
We recommend that we consult with your architect and structural
engineer during the preparation of the Site Development and
Foundation Plans. We should also review the final Site
Development and Foundation Plans for conformance with our
recommendations.
During construction, we should observe the drilling of pier holes
and/or footing excavations to confirm the anticipated subsurface
conditions and provide field recommendations for changed
conditions.
We should be given at least 10 working days tentative notice and
3 working days specific notice of all required construction
observations.
CX>NS-mucTION OBSERVATION A P PEN D I X
c,.~-::7~'__1 ~~~) '2- EXHIBIT NO. c...
~!~._~?-~' D{:: liq~ op, <<41 l1F t.j
10
r
r
r
[
r
r
(
I
I
[
L
L
L
L
L
l
l
l
L
A P PEN D I X A
GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS. RISKS. MATERIAL NOTES,
RESPONSIBILITY. LIMITATIONS AND RELATED ITEMS
1.0 GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS
1.1 Structural and utilitv Trench Backfill - All structural
backfill and utility trench backfill within improved areas and all
other backfill where good performance is desired should be placed
in thin lifts, moisture conditioned as required, and compacted
with an approved compaction device to at least 90 percent
compaction, ASTM D1557-70T(C) Compaction Test Method. The soil
backfill should be moisture conditioned to at least 3 percent wet
of optimum where expansive soils are present. Backfill materials
should be on-site materials approved by the soil engineer or
select imported materials approved by the soil engineer.
Where compaction is being performed adjacent to retaining walls,
foundations, and other structural elements, care should be taken
so that the compaction device does not damage or over-stress or
vibrate the structural elements or adjacent land and improvements.
Also, the contractor should take care to allow a sufficient amount
of time for the concrete to achieve the minimum structural
strength prior to any structural backfill operations. This amount
of time will have to be determined by the structural engineer and
may vary from 7 to 28 days after the concrete pour, and may be
longer during the cold season of the year when it takes a greater
length of time for the concrete hydration process to occur.
1.11 utilitv Trench Seal - All utility trenches entering
buildings with a downward slope or a drainage or seepage flow
toward buildings should be backfilled with on-site impervious
clay-silt soils or lean concrete for a horizontal distance af at
least 3 feet near their entry points to the buildings so as to
provide a seal against subsurface water infiltration through
granular trench backfill below the building. Also, in sloping
terrain including roads, driveways, parking areas, yard areas,
open areas, etc., similar utility seals should be installed at 50
to 100 feet intervals so that utility trench granular backfill
will not inadvertently act as a subdrain and change and
concentrate natural and historical subsurface drainage flow in a
possible adverse manner.
1.2 Landscaoe and Veqetation Restoration - At the conclusion of
the site construction, all barren and disturbed areas as well as
any graded areas such as cuts and fills should be adequately
seeded and planted with a variety of erosion-resistant grasses,
A-1
EXHIBIT NO. c..
4>, 4-f bF '7
TT -~-- -p-,- :: '-::::, . z...
p, '10 Dr 1/ '1
r
r
r
[
r
r
I
[
[
l
L
L
L
L
L
l
l
L
L
and vegetation and growth established and maintained prior to the
start of the heavy winter rains. Also, numerous shrubs and trees
should be planted for longer range protection. Such long-range
landscape efforts should hopefully include numerous drought-
tolerant plants as well as fast-growing shrubs and trees.
During construction, adequate temporary interim erosion control
should be provided in accordance with the "Manual of Standards for
Erosion and Sediment Control Measures" published by the
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG).
1.3 Construction Season - We generally recommend that site
development and foundation construction and related work be
performed during the dry season of the year. If the work is
. performed during the winter rainy season or shortly thereafter,
then the owner must accept the presence of higher earth hazard
risks and probable greater construction costs.
1.4 Future Construction and ImDrovements - We generally and
usually recommend that natural site grades be left in their
present condition and all site vegetation be left "as is" or
increased in density. Clearing or removing the site vegetation so
as to expose soil materials could result in future erosion and
sloughing. If it is desired to construct any new additions or any
significant yard improvements, then such improvements should
generally be built to conform with the existing hillside grades.
New cutting or filling could undermine and upset the existing site
equilibrium. All significant structural, yard and landscape
improvements should not be built without some consultation with
the appropriate design professionals, including architects,
landscape architects, soil and foundation engineers, and civil and
structural engineers.
1.5 Ground Water and Seeoaae Conditions - It should be realized
that ground water and seepage conditions may differ from that
observable at the surface and/or observed in test pits or test
borings. The ground water table will likely rise during periods
of intense and prolonged rainfall, and seepages may be present
during the winter months that may not be present at other times of
the year. If the owner desires accurate ground water and seepage
data, then observation wells should be installed by the owner and
monitored periodically.
1.6 Execution of Recommendations - This report, correspondence,
opinion, document or planes) has been prepared and issued to the
client with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the
owner and the contractor to fully execute and carry out to the
fullest extent the recommendations as provided in this report,
correspondence, opinion, document or planes).
A-2
EXHIBIT NO. c...
~. ''It'f of ~7
,,_u,___n_____'-' -, .. -. 2-
-r..~__.
"(, <11 OF 11'1
r
r
r
[
r
r
I
I
[
L
L
L
L
L
l
l
l
L
L
If.t~e recommendations presented in this report, correspondence,
op~n~on, document or planes) are not followed and carried out the
client is warned that adverse site performance and problems m~y
occur including, but not limited to, surface and subsurface
drainage problems, erosion, sloughing, sliding, settlement or
creep effects, and associated litigation.
If the soil engineer is not retained to observe the final plans
and is not retained to observe the soil engineering work during
construction, then the client should take warning that poor
performance or problems may arise and we cannot be responsible for
any such poor pe~formance or problems.
1.7 Site Chanaes - The soil-geotechnical engineering op~n~ons,
conclusions and recommendations as indicated in this report,
correspondence, document or planes) are based upon and were
specifically prepared for the site as it physically existed at the
time of our investigation or observation. Therefore, if the site
is in any way physically altered from the time of our
investigation or observation, such as by the placement of fill
upon the site or the excavation or removal of materials from the
site, or if similar physical changes occur on adjacent properties
so as to be close enough to influence this project or property,
then all of our opinions, conclusions and recommendations should
be considered null and void until we have provided written
supplemental soil-geotechnical engineering opinions, conclusions
and recommendations based upon a reevaluation of the changed site
conditions.
1.8 Codes and Ordinances - All present work and also future use
of the project shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building
Code, California civil Code, California common and case law, and
also in accordance with all local applicable codes, regulations
and procedures.
2. 0 RISKS
2.1 Earth Construction Risk - The client should clearly
understand that there is an inherent and assumed risk of sliding,
earth movement, settlement, land subsidence, erosion and sloughing
in all hillside, excavation, or fill embankment construction
regardless of precautions taken, and no guarantee or warranty can
be made as to the results that may be obtained. Erosion and
sliding are common in the earth scene and are a part of natural
landscape forming processes even when man has not entered the
natural scene in any way. Also, there is a quite common risk of
the very slow downslope movement or creep of soil and weathered
rock materials in hillside, excavation and fill embankment
construction. Also, expansive soils can heave upward with great
force.
A-J
EXIDBIT NO, c..
r, 50 t>F lF1
-""---. ~- --', -;', -.',....., .,
'-".
't -ca,: D~' Wj
r
r
r
[
r
r
I
I
I
[
L
L
L
L
L
l
l
L
L
2.2 Earthauake Risk - It should be clearly understood that
California and especially the greater San Francisco Bay Area is an
area of higher seismic risk. It should also be realized that it
is generally economically not feasible to build totally
earthquake-resistant structures or land improvements that would be
resistant to any and all earthquakes. Therefore, it is possible
that if a large or close earthquake occurred to this site, the
site and structure and improvements and land could be damaged and
there is an irreducible and assumed risk associated with living in
a seismically active area such as California with many active
faults.
2.3 Biah Rainfall Risk - There is an inherent and assumed risk
of occasional high to very high rainfall for those that reside in
or near the coast range hills and mountains of Northern
California. Occasionally, periods of intensive and/or prolonged
rainfall may occur that may result in erosion, sloughing, sliding
and/or flooding. Sometimes 4 to 8 inches of rain may fall in one
storm or in one day. In 1981-82 and 1982-83, more than 70 inches
of rain fell in San Rafael two years in a row. In January of
1982, 9 to 15 inches of rain fell from one 29-hour storm. In
February of 1986, up to 25 inches of rain fell in one week.
3 . 0 MATERIAL NOTES
3.1 Concrete - Generally, and unless specifically modified by
the foundation or structural engineer, all foundation concrete
should be 5 sack minimum, 3/4-inch maximum aggregate size, with a
compressive strength of 3,000 p.s.i. @ 28 days. For pumped
concrete, additional cement content is usually required to achieve
a strength of 3,000 p.s.i.
3.2 Reinforcina Steel - All reinforcing steel, unless otherwise
noted, should be '40 grade, have a yield strength of 40,000
p.s.i., and conform to ASTM Specification A615-40.
3.3 Uniform Buildina Code - All materials and workmanship shall
be in accordance with the current edition of the Uniform Buildirig
Code and also in conformance with generally accepted construction
practices.
4.0 CONTRACTOR'S AND BUILDING DESIGNER'S RESPONSIBILITY
4.1 Notice of Chanaed Conditions - The opinions, findings and
recommendations made in this report, correspondence, document or
planes) are based on the assumption that soil conditions do not
deviate significantly from those encountered by the test pits
and/or test borings and/or observed at the surface. Therefore, it
is the responsibility of the contractor to notify the soil
A-4
EXHIBIT NO. C.
-
- ?, 5, OF ~ 7
",l""'--C::*--7"-'-~'-,"-: ~.-.:.-.. .,."
__"._.__.,~,___ _, j. c---
P. q; bF {/~
r
r
r
[
[
r
I
I
L
L
L
L
[
L
l
l
l
L
L
engineer of all unforeseen or unanticipated subsurface conditions
encountered during construction; of particular importance are
springs and subsurface waters, weak and compressible soils,
abnormal hillside soil thickness, and the presence of landslide or
unstable materials or expansive soils.
4.2 Field Lavout - The contractor shall be responsible for all
layout, field dimensions and conformance with architectural,
structural and foundation plans. All layout shall be verified and
approved by the building designer and owner prior to construction
and concrete pours.
4.3 Notice of Construction Observations - The contractor shall
give the soil engineer 10 days tentative notice and 3 days
specific notice of all required construction observations.
4.4 Material certification - The contractor shall be responsible
for verifying, testing and certifying that all materials meet the
minimum specified and should make the use of a commercial
materials testing laboratory as required.
4.5 Conformance with Codes and Ordinances - The building
designer and contractor shall be responsible for verifying that
all building plans and layout are in accordance with all governing
building codes, and local regulations and ordinances, and commonly
accepted practices of personal and vehicular use and access.
5.0 JOB SAFETY
5.1 Safetv and Shorina - The contractor shall be responsible for
seeing that all work is performed in a safe and reasonable manner
with respect to both personal safety and property safety, and in
accordance with all governing safety regulations and commonly-
accepted safety practices. All work should be performed in
accordance with the Construction Safety Orders of the State of
California Department of Industrial Relations and O.S.H.A.
regulations, CAL/OSHA. It should be noted that trenches and
excavations can be dangerous to workmen and the public due to
cave-ins and/or falling boulders. Adequate shoring or
construction slopes as indicated in the CAL/OSHA Construction
Safety Orders shall be adhered to. The contractor (and not the
engineer) shall be responsible for the means, methods, teChniques
and sequences of construction.
5.2 Underaround Utilities - The contractor shall carefully
verify the location of all underground utilities prior to starting
work.
A-5
EXHIBIT NO. C.
f, 52.. ~ (,7
-,-,--_---- --" '7 -" " 2....-
r, Cf4 Dr:: WI
.. . .-'.
f
r
r
[
[
r
(
(
[
[
L
[
L
l
L
l
L
L
L
5.3 Protect Ad;acent structures - It shall be the responsibility
of the contractor to adequately shore and/or underpin and/or
retain and/or protect all existing adjacent structures, land,
utilities, roadways or other improvements during all site
construction as required by California Civil Code Section 832 and
California common law, and give adequate notice to all adjacent
property owners.
6.0 LIMITATIONS
6.1 Variabilitv of Subsurface Conditions - It should be clearly
understood that subsurface conditions are often complex and may
vary from those indicated by surface conditions or surface
observation or those encountered at test pit or test hole
locations. Also, the passage of time and natural and man-caused
effects may change subsurface and surface conditions at the test
pit or test hole locations. Therefore, it should be clearly
understood that the information and recommendations developed by
the soil-geotechnical engineer are 'only expressions of
professional opinion and are based solely on information available
to him at the time of the site observation and/or site
investigation and/or rendering of services within the authorized
scope of work and fee, and the soil-geotechnical engineer can make
no warranty, either expressed or implied, as to the findings,
opinions, conclusions, recommendations or professional advice.
6.2 Liabilitv of Soil Enaineer - It should be clearly understood
by the client that professional persons such as soil engineers
sell services for the guidance of others in their economic,
financial and personal affairs and they are not liable in the
absence of negligence or intentional misconduct. The services of
experts such as soil engineers are sought because of their special
skill. When a person hires such a specialist, he is not justified
to expect infallibility, but can expect only reasonable care and
competence within the engineer's scope of work and fee
limitations. The client who hires such an expert purchases a
service in the form of professional opinion and not insurance. A
soil engineer cannot be held liable on the grounds of strict
liability. (Swett vs. Gribaldo, Jones & Associates, 40 Cal. App.
3rd 573)
A-6
EXHIBIT NO, c..
'P. 53 oF "7
. .. 2-
~. 'f~ o~ Il'l
r
r
r
f
r
r
I
[
I
[
1
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
7. 0 LAND MAINTENANCE
7.1 Drainaqe and Earth Reoairs - The proper control and
maintenance of surface and subsurface storm, seepage, irrigation,
and leakage waters and facilities is important to site stability
and should be provided to the fullest practical extent. Site
drainage waters should be discharged into an approved legal area
storm drain system or fully dispersed as indicated by common and
statute law. Extreme care should be used so that storm waters are
not collected and not discharged onto neighboring property where
problems or damage could occur. Periodic land maintenance should
be performed as required including the repair of excessive
gullying and erosion, maintaining adequate dense vegetation cover
or equivalent on slopes, and the prompt repair of all erosion,
sloughing and sliding. When expansive soils are present, care
should be taken so that planting areas are only lightly irrigated
and not over-irrigated, and not saturated and water not allowed to
pond.
7.2 Resoonsibilitv of Ad;acent Prooertv OWners - It shall be the
responsibility of all adjacent property owners to adequately
maintain and safely and properly develope their sites so as not to
affect this site. Of particular importance is for adjacent
property owners not to remove lateral support, and to maintain all
existing areas where lateral slope has been removed, and to
control drainage waters. In addition, adjacent property owners
should maintain their land so it cannot flow or slide onto this
site.
7,3 Cut and Fill Slooe Reoairs - It should be noted that with
time all cut slopes and fill slopes generally deteriorate and
require some maintenance.
8.0 CONSTRUCTION PROCEDURES
8.1 Drilled piers - Where drilled pier foundations are
recommended, they should be drilled with an approved drill rig of
sufficient drilling depth capacity and of adequate weight and
drilling pressure so as to penetrate well into the underlying
recommended bearing materials. All pier holes should be vertical
and plumb. Piers should be poured promptly after drilling. Prior
to the pouring of concrete, all loose materials should be removed
from the bottom of all pier holes. This is especially important
for end bearing piers. In such instances, the contractor should
provide adequate casing for the protection of all workmen if they
are required to enter any underground pier hole, If, during
construction, wet or caving ground is encountered, adequate casing
shall be provided by the contractor. This casing shall generally
be removed in an approved satiSfactory manner while the concrete
is poured. All pier holes should be poured in the dry and all
water should be pumped from the bottom of the pier holes prior to
concrete pours or approved tremie methods used.
A-7
,;"~~'-'~"--'l -," ~ z....-
----~>t& OF' -il~-'-
VXJ-IIBIT NO. c..
-
P. 5<<.1 CF ~7
r
r
r
[
[
r
r
[
[
I
L
L
L
L
L
L
l
L
l
8.2 Difficult Pier Drillina - It has been our experience that
occasionally on drilled pier projects it is not possible to drill
the drilled pier holes due to abundant boulders and/or hard or
erratic bedrock conditions. Therefore, the client should be
clearly warned that there is an inherent risk in all drilled pier
foundation construction and that added cost may be encountered at
such sites where drilled piers are recommended based on test pit
or test boring data or visual observation, but during construction
drilled piers cannot be drilled due to boulders or bedrock
conditions. In such cases, it may be required to excavate, either
with backhoes and/or hand excavation, larger deep spread footings
extending through various boulder materials and bottoming in
competent bedrock materails and/or relocating the building to a
new location and/or using an alternative foundation scheme and/or
using special drilling procedures including the use of a gad, spud
or boulder buster, hoe ram, blasting, or special drilling bits or
coring buckets.
8.3 SDread Footinas - All spread footings should bottom in firm
or stiff soil or rock materials as' determined by the soil engineer
and shall be free of all loose materials and free of standing
water at the time of the concrete pour.
9.0 ENGINEER-CLIENT RELATIONS AND ADDITIONAL LIMITATIONS
9.1 Soil ReDort for Client OnlY - Any and all reports,
correspondences, documents, planes), findings, opinions,
recommendations, specifications or professional advice provided
are intended for the sole and exclusive use of the client and
specifically for the named project within a reasonable time after
the rendering of the engineering services described in this
report. To avoid any misinterpretation or improper use of
information provided by the soil engineer, the client shall not
make any such information available to others nor disclose content
thereof (except to owners and future owners) without the specific
expressed consent of the soil engineer.
9.2 Adherence to Recommendations - The conclusions and
recommendations as presented in this report, correspondence,
document or planes) are based upon the assumption that the client,
contractor, owner and future owners will strictly adhere to these
recommendations to the fullest possible extent during both the
construction and future use of the project. A complete copy of
this report shall be fully disclosed and made available to the
first owner of the project and all subsequent owners during the
economic life of the project.
9.3 Enaineer's SCODe of Work - The engineer's scope of work for
this soil report, correspondence, opinion, document or planes) is
outlined in the introduction of this document and is limited to
that specifically stated, and is dependent upon the size and
extent of the project, anticipated conditions, and the fee and
A-8
EXHIBIT NO, C-
p. 55" OF (P7
L-
'p'- C,7 or:o -/ j lf~
r
r
r
[
r
r
(
(
I
L
L
[
L
L
l
l
L
L
L
budget made available to the engineer by the client. During
construction, all construction observations made by the soil
engineer will be on an on-call basis and will be charged at an
hourly rate plus expenses, and are not included in the fee for the
soil report. It is the responsibility of the contractor to
adequately notify the soil engineer of all construction
'observations.
9.31 Hazardous Materials or Wastes - The soil-geotechnical
engineers's scope of work DOES NOT include toxic or hazardous man-
made and/or natural wastes or materials. The client would have to
consult with a speciality hazardous-toxic materials-environmental
consultant regarding this topic.
9.32 Corrosion - The soil-geotechnical engineer's scope of work
DOES NOT include an evaluation of the corrosion properties of the
soil. A corrosion engineer would have to be consulted regarding
this topic.
9.33 Tree Hazard - The soil-geotechnical engineer's scope of work
DOES NOT include tree hazard evaluation. A qualified and
experienced tree expert such as a certified arborist or registered
forester would have to be consulted regarding this topic.
9.34 Hvdroloav. Hvdraulics, and Flood Hazard - The soil-
geotechnical engineer's scope of work DOES NOT include hydrology,
hydraulics and/or flood hazards. A specialist in that field would
have to be consulted regarding this topic.
9.35 LandscaDe-Aaricultural Oualities - The soil-geotechnical
engineer's scope of work DOES NOT include the landscape,
gardening, and/or agricultural qualities and properties of the
soil for vegetation growth. A specialist in that field would have
to be consulted regarding this topic.
9.4 AcceDtance and Use of Soil ReDort, PaYment for Soil ReDort.
and Construction Observations - The client, by accepting, keeping,
and/or using this report or correspondence or opinion or document
or planes), hereby obligates himself/herself/themselves to accept
and to agree to all of the total contents therein of the text,
plates, and appendices, and agrees to follow all recommendations,
and also to pay the soil engineer for the preparation of the soil
report, correspondence, opinion, document or plan(s), and to pay
for all construction observations called for by the client or his
agent or contractor.
9.5 Time Limit of ReDOrt - This geotechnical report,
correspondence, opinion, document or planes) is valid only for 3
years (unless updated and amended by the soil engineer) from the
date of issue, or until the occurence of a significant special
local event such as a larger earthquake, a very wet winter or very
large storm or significant changes on any adjacent land.
A-9
.-,-,." -- .- - -,'- -z.-
____._ .c.. , '...~"_'.__---'
p, q g DF 11 '1
EXHIBIT NO. C
p. 5Ct> OF {p7
[
r
r
f.
r
r
I
I
I
L
L
L
, "
L
L
l
l
L
L
L
9.6 Construction continaencv/Unanticicated Conditions _
Subsurface conditions commonly may vary between the various points
of exploration or from those observed from the surface and/or may
vary from those anticipated. Such variations, if encountered
during construction, frequently require additional costs to
satisfactorily complete the project. Therefore, we suggest that a
reserve contingency fund be available to deal with unanticipated
and unforeseen conditions.
9,7 Limitations and Liabilitv - Soil-geotechnical engineering
associated with soil, rock, and structures and improvements
thereon or therein is a very high risk-low compensation service,
and the fee of the engineer is very small in relation to the total
cost of the project. Also, the engineer receives no long-term or
lasting benefit from the project. Also, the engineer is not in
control of the work and is not the superintendent of the work,
The soil-geotechnical engineer is in the business of providing
geotechnical engineering opinions and is not an insurer.
Therefore, the total aggregate liability and indemnity of the
soil-geotechnical engineer for any actual design errors or
omissions or claims for damages arising out of the soil-
geotechnical engineer's services is limited to five times the fee
paid to the soil-geotechnical engineer. This total aggregate
limit of liability shall also apply to any claims of any sort from
future owners and/or users of the project and/or other parties.
A-IO
lrT-:';~"':._-''''''''-_-''' ?\"':"""'"': 2.-
"Cc_~~-p.~q4;~~-)lCj~
T."XHIBIT NO. C
-
p~ '57 OF (p)
r
r
r
[
r
r
(
(
L
L
l
!.t;:L:c
1,'::~~:",:
~;r"!:;;I;", .
~.;' . """/' .'"
I'
L
L
L
L
L
A P PEN D I X B
CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE
SECTION 832
LATERAL SUPPORT FROM ADJOINING OWNER
Each coterminous owner is entitled to the lateral and subjacent support
which his land receives from the adjoining land, subject to the right
of the owner of the adjoining land to make proper and usual excavations
on the same for purposes of construction or improvement, under the
following conditions:
1. Any owner of land or his lessee intending to make or to permit
an excavation shall give reasonable notice to the owner or owners of
.adjoining lands and of buildings or other structures, stating the depth
ta which such excavatian is intended to be made, and when the excavating
will begin.
,2. In making any excavation, ordinary care and skill shall be used,
and reasonable precautians taken to sustain the adjoining land as such,
without regard to any building or other structure which may be thereon,
and there shall be no liability for damage done, to any such building or
other structure by reason of the excavation, except as otherwise provide
or allowed by law.
3. If at any time it appears that the excavation is to be of greater
depth than are the walls ar foundations of any adjoining building or
other structure, and is ta be so close as to endanger the building or
other structure in any way, then the owner of the building or other
structure must be allowed at least 30 days if he so desires, in which
to take measures ta protect the same trom any damage, or in which to
extend the foundations thereof, and he must be given for the same
purposes reasonable license to enter an the land on which the excavation
is to be or is being made.
4. If the excavatian is intended to be or is deeper than the standard
depth of foundations, which depth is defined to be a depth of nine feet
below the adjacent curb level, at the point where the joint property lin
intersects the curb and if on the land of the coterminous owner there is
any building or other structure the wall or foundation of which goes to
standard depth or deeper then the owner of the land on which the excava-
tian is being made shall, if given the necessary license to enter on the
adjoining land, protect the said adjoining land and any such building or
other structure thereon without cost ta the owner thereof, fram any
damage by reason of the excavatian, and shall be liable to the owner of
such property for any such damage, excepting only for minor settlement
cracks in building or other structures.
0-:~~~-~"':=~~J~I'I~ I':.'J;. ~
EXHIBIT NO. C-
o
P. 5~ OF ~7
P, 100 b~ IIi
.r
r
r
r
r
r
I
I
[
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
l
L
L
A P PEN D I X ~
CONCRETE SLABS (EXPANSIVE SOIL CONDITIONS)
It should be noted that the upper portions of the site soils
are generally loose,and susceptible to settlement. It also
should be noted that the site soils are expansive.
Expansive soils are generally clayey or silty soils that are
relatively sensitive to changes in moisture content. Expansive
soils can shrink and swell significant amounts with changes in
moisture cantent resulting in the uplift movement and cracking
of lightly loaded foundation elements, concrete slabs and
flexible pavement areas. In addition, expansive soils may lose
cansiderable strength when wet and moderately to heavily loaded
foundation elements may experience plastic nonrecoverable move-
ment each season.
We generally recommend that concrete slab-on-grade floors not be
used for hauses. We recommend that timber joist supported floor
systems be used. However, in garage areas concrete slab-on-grade
floors probably will be used. In concrete garage slab areas, one
of the following approaches should be used:
1) Around the entire perimeter of the garage slab, a 36 inch
deep grade beam or 36 inch deep footing as appropriate shauld be
constructed so as to constitute a maisture cutaff and thus maintain
a relatively constant moisture cantent in the slab subgrade area.
The existing soil subgrade should be excavated at least 12 inches
or more until relatively stiff soils are encountered. At least
12 inches af the soil subgrade that has been excavated should be
discarded. The exposed surface then shauld be scarified to a depth
of 6 inches, moisture conditioned to at least 3% wet of optimum and
then compacted to at least 85% compaction, ASTM Dl557-70T(C) Com-
paction Test Method. The soil subgrade should be thoroughly wetted
Ei~-:'-""'-:~,'--;"-",~,-,; 7'~',"-'-, <? J;1XHIPIT NO '
___'..' .., ~'. '<-- c: ~..... . \"...
P, /0/ or:- 119-- 1'. 59 of (,7.
r
r
r
r
r
r
I
r
I
L
L
L
L
L
L
l
L
L
L
so as to clase all expansion cracks. Then at least 12 inches
or more of select, imported fill materials should be placed in
thin lifts, moisture conditioned as required and compacted to
at least 90% compaction, All select, imported fill materials
should be nanexpansive, have a plasticity index less than 12,
a liquid limit less than 25, be free of organic materialf be
free of rocks greater than 3 inches in size, yet have sufficient
fines so as to be relatively imperviaus. Floor slabs should also
be underlain by at least 4 inches of clean, free draining drain
ro'ck and an imperviaus, waterproof membrane. Concrete slabs
should be separated from all foundation elements by a 1/2 inch
flexible connection. The flexible cannection between the foun-
dation elements and the slab will allow the slab to settle a
small amaunt without excessive cracking.
2) Another appraach would be to excavate the existing expansive
site soils ta a depth of at least 36 inches and at least 4 feet
beyond the perimeter of all slab areas. The excavated fill
materials shauld be discarded. The expased soil subgrade should
then be moisture canditioned to at least 3% wet of optimum and
compacted to about 90% compact~an, ASTM D1557-70T(C) Compaction
Test Method. The soil subgrade should then be thoroughly wetted
sa as ta close all expansion cracks, Select imported fill
materials should then be spread in thin lifts, moisture can-
ditioned to aptimum and compacted ta at least 90% compaction.
All select imported materials should be nonexpansive, have. a
plasticity index less than 12, a liquid limit less than 25, be
free of organic material, be free of rocks greater than 3 inches
in size, yet have sufficient fines so as to be relatively imper-
vious. The floor slab should be underlain by at least 4 inches
af clean, free draining drain rock and an impervious waterproof
membrane. Concrete slabs should be separated from all faundation
elements by a 1/2 inch flexible connection. This flexible connec-
tici'n between the foundation elements and the slab will allow the
slab to settle a small amount without excessive cracking.
-.,'::2,',,-.---.-, --'-, _n 2-- f7'Yr:I~DIT l\'JO C.
C. __,_ ._,_ . -. '.-- 1n.l.'.
'--1~ /Oz.. of- 11<1 P. (,0 /)r:. '-)-
r
r
r
r
r
r
[
I
(
[
L
L
L
L
L
If the above concrete garage floor slab alternatives are not
economically feasible, then at the very least the contractor
should overexcavate and recompact the existing an-site soils
that are very loose within the garage slab area. Such recompac-
tion should include maisture conditioning to at least 3% wet of
optimum and compacting to at least 85% compaction. The resulting
floor slab should float with a 1/2 inch flexible connection
becween the garage slab and the foundation elements. Prior to
the concrete pour the garage slab area should be thoroughly
flooded and saturated so that it will be in a fully expanded con-
dition and all expansian cracks closed. Also, additional slab
reinforcement could help reduce slab cracking. However, some
garage slab cracking, uplift and settlement should be anticipated.
l
l
l
L
C-3
EXHIBIT NO. c...
? ~(OF(P7
~._~...-=~~=~~;.~ 2 ~.. :,i.~
1. IO"J bf: Wi
r
r
r
[
[
r
(
I
[
[
L
L
L
L
L
l
l
L
L
APPENDIX G
GENERAL FOUNDATION NOTES
All pier holes and foundation excavations should be promptly
pouTed after excavation. If it is required to leave pier hales
or excavations open, then they should be very securely and safely
covered so that children, small animals and people cannot fall
into the pier holes or excavatians,
All pier holes should be dry and free of all loose materials at
the time of the concrete pour. If water is present in any pier
holes, then such water should be removed by the use of a commer-
cial sump pump or other approved method. If the pier holes experi-
ence any caving effects, then casing should be provided by the con-
tractor with the casing removed as the concrete pour is made. If
the rate of water and flaw into the pier hole is such that it is not
possible ta pump the pier hole dry, then special tremie-type pour-
ing methods shauld be used wit~ the soil engineer present so that
appropriate inspection and recammendations can be pravided.
The proposed struc~ure and all site development should, at the
very minimum, be designed and constructed in accordance with the
minimum requirements of the Uniform Building Code, latest edition.
In areas where wood joist floors are used, adequate crawlspace
clearance should be pravided. Alsa, all foundation crawl space
areas should be pravided with adequate openings and ventilation
as required by the Uniform Building Code. All foundation crawl
space elements should be provided with access openings so that
they may be inspected and entered in future times as required.
,. L
__"._,_'___.u.___._ .,_ ._ j ""-" ~___~_"1
p, /04 or:: ll"
BXHIBIT NO, C-
'P. (02. bF (P7
r
r
r
F
r
r
I
I
[
L
L
L
L
l
APPENDIX I
NUISANCE AND LIABILITY FOR CONDITION OF LAND
3479. CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE - Nuisance deFined:
Anything which Is Injurious to health, or Is indecent or
ofFensive to the senses, or an obstruction to the Free use of
property, so as to interFere with the comFortable enjoyment of
liFe or property. or unlawfully obstructs the Free passage or
use., in the customary manner, of any navigable lake. or river.
bay, stream. canal, or basin. or any public park, square. street,
or highway, is a nuisance.
3483. CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE - Continuing nuisance; liabIlity of
successive owners For Failure to abate:
Successive owners. Every successive owner of property who
neglects to abate a continuing nuisance upon, or in the use of,
such property, created by a former owner. is liable therefor in
the same manner as the one who First created it.
364. RESTATEMENT OF TORTS, 2ND: Creation or Maintenance OF
Dangerous ArtiFicial Conditions
A possessor of land Is subject to liability to others outside
of the land For physical harm caused by a structure or other
artiFicial condition on the land, which the possessor realizes or
should realize will involve an unreasonable risk of such harm, iF
(a) the possessor has created the condition, or
(b) the condition is created by a third person with the
possessor's consent or acquiescence while the land is in his
possession, or
(c) the condition is created by a third person without
the possessor's consent or acquiescence, but reasonable care Is
not taken to make the condition saFe aFter the possessor knows or
should know of ft.
365. RESTATEMENT OF TORTS, 2ND: Dangerous Disrepair
l
l
L
L
L
A possessor of land is SUbject to lfabll ity to others outside
of the land For physical harm caused by the disrepair of a
structure or other artiFicial condition thereon, iF the exercise
of reasonable care by the possessor or by any person to whom he
entrusts the maintenance and repair thereoF
(a) would have disclosed the disrepair and the
unreasonable risk Involved therein, and
(b) would have made it reasonably saFe by repair or
otherwise.
~-r~-'--:_.m:'~-"-'l .....,
-__:______._.__-_ '_' ..', ; ,--'i~.~.q_~....
~, I~~ pF- WI
EXHIBIT NO. C.
1'. (,3 oF (P7
r
r
r
f
r
r
I
[
[
[
L
L
L
L
L
l
l
L
L
366. RESTATEMENT OF TORTS. 2ND: Artlrlclal Conditions ExIstIng
When PossessIon Is Taken
One who takes possessIon or land upon which there Is an
exIstIng structure or other artIFicIal condition unreasonably
dangerous to persons or property outside or the land Is subject to
liabIlIty For physical harm caused to them by the condItIon arter,
but on I y arter.
(a) the possessor knows or should know or the conditIon.
and
(b) he knows or should know that It exIsts without the
consent or those arfected by It. and
(c) he has railed after a reasonable opportunity, to
make It safe or otherwise to protect such persons agaInst It.
___;.~~_.~,-:__n._. "~,-'l .~. -. ~..! 2,....-
-.----1'.-/0<0' '(;P-t!f
1-2
8XHIBIT NO. C
p. fo4 6F "'7
r
r
r
r
r
r
I
(
[
L
L
L
L
L
L
l
l
L
L
A P PEN D I X S
SIDEWALKS, CURBS, PATIOS, DRIVEWAYS, ETC.
(EXPANSIVE SOIL CONDITIONS)
It should be noted that the site soils exhibit expansive soil
properties and expansive soils can exert considerable uplift
pressures on concrete and paving areas which can ,result in some
differential movement. It is generally possible to greatly
reduce or eliminate the expansive soil effects upon a house or
cpmmercial foundation; however, such procedures are somewhat
costly. Therefore, at an expansive soil site the sidewalks,
curbs, patio areas, driveways, porches, decks, landscaping walls
,. -
and s,imilar minor development may be subjected to some uplift,
'cracking, movement and settlement and these effects may have to
.be considered a part of building on a site where expansive soils
are present. Reducing or eliminating the effects of expansive
soils generally may not be economically feasible for most residen-
tial and commercial structures outside of the main structure itself.
However, if it is desired to reduce or eliminate the effects of
expansive soils on concrete and paved areas, we can provide
specific recommendations if yau so request.
Such specific recommendations might include one or some combination
of the following: special and additional steel reinforcement; total
or partial removal af expansive soils and replacement'with select,
nonexpansive, compacted imported fill; limitation of the size of
flatwark areas; use of frequent flexible joints; lime soil treat-
ment; special drainage measures and/or placement on drilled piers.
However, unless thorough and probably costly measures are taken,
some movement and periodic repair and maintenance can usually be
anticipated at a site with expansive soils.
-"'..'-:" "~..;.~ -.. ' 2---
~'-'--"-'-'-'-*._'~-- .. - , -~,.. ~-_.,---..
p. 107 or ~lcr
EXHIBIT NO, c..
'P. (Q~ OF ~7 -
r
r
r
[
~~:,
r
I
(
[
L
L
L
L
'\~;""
L
L
l
l
L
L
L
A P PEN 0 I X U
UTILITY TRENCH EROSION CONTROL
On hillside locations great care should be exercised in the
installation and backfilling of utility trenches. If utility
trenches are not well compacted and adequate erosion control
and drainage measures are not taken, the utility trenches chan-
nel water and lead to significant erosion and gullying.
All utility trenches should be backfilled as indicated in
Section 1.1 of Appendix A. In sloping areas, periodic erosion
control boards with stakes, jute slope protection matting,
spreading of straw, adequate vegetation planting and/or other
special requirements may be necessary depending upon the degree
of slope arid quantity of drainage runoff.
, .
In very steep areas or in cut slope areas, or in areas where
significant erosion has occurred in the past, it may be required
to cover the utility trench with grouted riprap or sacked concrete.
~- I".~'-~~ ~:-~~_= :~.--~~ ~,' .-.~ ~~_~ -.
p, 108 OF 119
TITBIT NO, C.
y! (,(,0': (P7
r
r
r
r
r
r
~.<:
[
r
[
L
L
L
[
L
L
l
l
l
L
A P PEN D I X V
VEGETATIDN AND EROSION CONTROL
Vegetation and Landscape Preservation - Site clearing should be
perf6rmed only where the actual structure will be located, and
outside of the actual structure building area we recommend that
all of the existing site vegetation be left in its natural condi-
tion. ,We strongly recommend against any general site clearing as
such general site clearing could result in barren areas that could
result in considerable erosion which could affect downslope prop-
erties and related development and streams.
Erosion Control - We recommend that prudent erosion control
measures be taken during and af~er construction, including limita-
tion of site disturbance outside the actual building area and
proper planting and vegetation restoration of all barren and dis-
turbed areas after construction. In the interim period between
planting and vegetation growth re-establishment, straw and/or jute
slope protection matting and/or staked redwood boards should be
used as appropriate to help limit erosion.
General Erosion Control - Provision should be made for adequate
post-construction erosion control and the "Manual of Standards
for Erosion and Sediment Control Measures" published by the
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) should be followed
and adhered to as appropriate.
--..-- ~d __z_
P.'~ OF=- 1l'1
EXHIBIT NO, c...
1>. ~7 OF (,7
.
DRAINAGE STUDY
885 TIBURON BLVD,
TIBURON
OCTOBER 1996
REVISED JANUARY 1997
(ADDED 100 YR. STORM CALC.)
BY
BRACKEN & KEANE
Civil Engineers & land Surveyors
5710 Paradise Drive, Ste. 8
Corte Madera, CA 94925
(415) 927-8801
EXHIBIT NO, 0'
-:;c~~--'~--, ~ ,- ~ '2...- ~
.--'. '..-- -, "----' r. I OF ~
P. 110 OF=- Il<=(
BRACKEN & KEANE
Civil Engineers & Land Surveyars
5710 Paradise Drive, Ste. 8
Corte Madera. CA 94925
(415) 927-8801
October 7, 1996
DIXON POWER
885 B TIBURON BLVD
TIBURON CA 94920
RE: 885 TIBURON BLVD.
TIBURON
SUBJECT: DRAINAGE STUDY
Dear Mr. Power,
The following is our report on the study of the drainage conditions
on your property at 885 Tiburon Blvd. in Tiburon. The study was
conducted in accordance with your request.
The scope of work includes the following:
a) Hydrological study of the property in its present
condition, and after completion of proposed and future
improvements including the access driveway.
b) Hydrological study of total watershed contributing to the
existing drainage facility in Tiburon Blvd., using
available topographic information supplemented with a
site visit.
c) A hydraulic evaluation of the adequacy of the existing
recipient drainage facility in Tiburon Blvd. . ,
d) Preliminary recommendations for drainage improvements if
needed.
General
The subject property is located at 885 Tiburon Blvd., Tiburon, CA.
The watershed contributing to the existing drainage structure on
Tiburon Blvd. below the subject property is approximately 80.6
acres.
Proposed new improvements within the property and servicing the
property are as follows:
a) New driveway access.
----'--~~.-._-.c ~.. -- 2-
p, !II 0'1= 11'1
---..-.-'.. '-'
'-' , ~.'.
BXHIBIT NO,3L-
1>, 2- c>'F 8'
Dixon Power
October 7, 1996 Page 2
b) Future house (assumed).
c) Future hardscape (assumed).
Runoff from the entire watershed was calculated for existing and
post development conditions. Also, additional runoff added to the
watershed area due to the new driveway was calculated.
Hydrological and hydraulic computations are presented in the
appendix. The storm runoff was determined using the rational
method.
Available Data. ,Information. and Assumptions
a) Topographic survey of subject property January 1996 by
this office, scale 1" = 20'.
b) USGS topographic map 1954 (revised 1980).
c) site examination by Bracken & Keane, September 1996.
d)
Drainage facilities collecting runoff
watershed areas are assumed to be adequate
do not contribute t~ subject watershed.
from other
and therefore
Discussion
The projected runoff for the entire watershed is as follows:
25 Yr. 100 Yr. Storm
Existing Condition
Proposed development and added watershed
82.9 cfs 101.2 cfs
84.7 cfs 103.3 cfs
Percentage increase in discharge due to
proposed new development
2.1 % 2.1%
The capacity of the existing concrete box culvert crossing Tiburon
Blvd. below subject property is calculated at 164.6 cubic feet per
second (cfs). This is sufficient for the projected 100 year storm.
The added area to the watershed due to the proposed driveway access
is 1.84 acres (2.3% of total watershed). The existing storm water
runoff condition for this watershed area consists of an informal
drainage system of hand excavated earth ditches and old steel pipe
draining around the properties on Mac Annan ct. and Tiburon Blvd.
to a catch basin on Tiburon Blvd. The proposed driveway access
would eliminate a portion of storm water runoff entering this
system, thereby reducing the rainfall impact on the informal
drainage system.
Tl'"':r:-,~"'--'-..--'j ".'c'"'"', L-
__!...~.J...__..._.._,_.. .,'. .::.. . ,J.
p, Ill..-- OF II~
EXHIBIT NO. 1)
.,. 3 os:: i'
Dixon Power
October 7, 1996 Page 3
Conclusions and Recommendations
The incremental flow in the drainage ways due to proposed additions
is, for practical purposes, negligible (a little over 2 percent).
No modification to the downstream storm system is recommended at
this time.
The ,new drainage system for the proposed property should be
designed or reviewed by a licensed engineer.
Should you have any questions or require additional information,
feel free to contact me at (415) 927-8801.
Sincerely,
Bracken & Keane
~SX:::~=---7;l'" - '2..--
-. - - j ,.."..
,?, II 3 Dr=: wi
EXHIBIT NO. \)
? <<+ OF e
--._+:
... ~. !
",' '
').
~, !
BY_:: .: l
CATf
._-t
S U BJ ECT _.......___............._._...._..
!
L.-...__...
SHEET NO. ........._.OF,_
.JOB NO....._.._.__.__._
.. i_CHKC. By_..____DATE:. ....__._._.
....-.-....-................-..-.-.-.......-................--......-......---....-...-
-.-...--.---..---..-...-.......-.--....... ............-..-..............-...-...--.....-............--...........-.-...-.......... ....-... ..--..-..-...-.-......-....--.-
,
.. ' f:;- ~_,.1 ~
\.-lj-~;
,Tn':'; ",
'ill: I.,
.'~Jr1j;: .
: ~...t--I' .' I _ ~
s- ~ ' ! _ f-: ,- ~ ' . -.
..tf~rzf I : ; t 7
.~.;....; t.. ,_'.J .
L,Lr~~t' :, ;
ilH.t" · '
rf~t~., i: :
~. ~-~pl - . ; -
:Tfit':~ '
, :Utl
:H.{ r.:. I
._.-....~r.f..-..;-.,_.
;.~ Iu ~ I ~ , : ;
~ :. f
: ii'
'; 1
, ,
,666 TIe.>Uf2.0N
TllbUtz-ON ,
~LND
cAL-\r-o~ IA
. ,
DP,^~l ~AGre.,
t1rVD'C-
i ,
. " '(--: ,
'i,
,
APF'eNt>l~
, '
i'
""';:'1' " ; : " , ;' !
'll-1!,~.j , j,: ; , , , l "
- .,j,_..,. '0 . ._ ,. . !~_ .'
Ltt-.i J i~ j.: , : ; :"
: trILl: l.: ' . :'
. : ; I j. i :- ': ~ ~ - ~
. ~ i ! I . .
- ; ~ ' j ;
, I
,LT
; i: i '
'-7'1 ' ' .
":i '
. 1__.
\;! ,
..' "
'. ,
,
~l~
CMlD~
ocro,6e.e. /9:?b
<JNJ UAt2-\' f'Y17
IDOl(%., ~f2H CAL6)
': I
[
~ I. .
. ,I
" ,
-',,--,
';1
..
z -- -~..
i
L
~
..
~
a
TI:JC~_~~:,:~: ~\~.::. Z-
.y, llc.J 01=- II q
EXHIBIT NO. \)
'P.5oF%"
_,,-~,",,,. ,i', -n~ .....I,d'
~. ", ': j . ~ ,BY_jL_______DATE' :r-J.~
: !.. ~ ~ ,-' .
... ..~,~ i".:CHKO. BV_____DATE............._...
~ ;.l-,
I . __....____.._.__..._._.........._.............._
SUBJECT ............................................. _'"''''''
--..........-.-
SHEET No._..L_OF...~
JOB No.lz.,..::9.2-~~
..-.-......-..................-......--..-......---.-.----.---..---....--.....-..-
...................-....-.....................-........-....----.....--.--..-... ........-
.........-.......----......-..-.--.
. t ,:
'0:,
: ;lT1r-!:, H'fOf2-QLo6,j
, f'; I.. '. '
. Lt. A l.. ..IA....,..~nlAl .
; J'1 f . I' I 1"'l7'\ I t:A""" l.-"
'.:- ~~.! ::, , l ~ (' ,,)
,i:Lu.;.;.Li ,..l;,. :." I. U0G,oS IOf'O nnt'"" ''154-- ~l~ (,?eo
:illH'i ,( ':':., 2~ 4i?1n:-- t::.-,XAMIJ.JATIO/-.l er 1Tt~ ~lc-e./ lD/4/c}6
. i:~ '. ?,.n::..t-lTAT/Ve.. fv(A-P ~ T-Hf'".;! OF-Plc.e "'12.~'5-2~
: -r.:l ~ ,} ! -,
f '.1 !,' f "
, :-r-rrt:',' -
.:"' I.
':i il,;
, ;-j I ' , ,
: l_l_~ ;',
~:-~ti:t., :' : ': :
.~~~~..... ,
. ..j, ~ ~
:.' I
:: ,.
Ii?, ,M~ttoD
. t<.v,tJoPF- l&? ~u:...vt...f'rr~ -rot2- z..'5 AIJp'(ooYtZ-. '01~
f, Ve;;,W~?At/OIJAl..- M~-Hoo ?t:'I1--bIP(""E:h, ,'.....,
" ,
,! 'WA-r~ '~~ \..X.A'le-v IN z.o!-4e:.. I,? Ff20H
NA? "L" At-JD z:.of..le e;.z r-tzoH 'f-.I(AP"V"
v, CA.vvU/,.AT10~; ,
'\
WA'-~t7+f~ ~ 8o.f,:;;Ac.-. APPt%O}(I~TE.!""'1
'~IL.:\ UP A~ (~D01 ~V6f?/ f'tl<;Tlc6d=::rz:;. ,..)='21
, ,
, t.
.; ..: t
:. !
:. :- ~ '
t .:,,'j
....:..~ \-.' ". -
~ ( , :,
'"......< j , . ...., . ! . ,
. ~ ~i l.'~ :.,' ,1
,i :'; i.' ,:: i
.i.. !.'".':: i';.' !
~ i_ j..! : I. _ . 1'; , ; , ~
': l:~ !.'!..,:. . . : i t
1 . ~,t. . , .. . ' '. .'
, ;:'1-1-Ct ; ! : ~: '.:'
'.u, I, '.., .' , '
; r.+tt. Ltt.~.~ . ': i.; ;
;:: fi . ' , : ' '
, "J.''"'I'.' ,.."
i_..i- .'
i :'1-1.' .
':,: I "
:' I "
. _... I ..; ; .
: ;.fj-J._~.: ,..
, i..t.
.. i I ..
. t !!.,:
.-. ..
: r; .
.1 Uz.uWo ~ c..o~\U1 a..l\-z::,
.; " ~(e:7rH.lGr CO~DI'TlO~0
t!>()!L.-1 UP f\F-eA.
~eE;P GJ~e:..o ~e'e:h
N 1111 e>oottA-J.JD ~!wl e. ~
-n ,".U::.. or::- cotJ ~TfZ.A:TION
0=-0."5" .,
c. =- 0; 50
i
OV~VA-ND FLOW
t :..1+:.. 2.)1. L...J' Y"\
:z;, l' t?
(,...:=:- IIoCj()' I?~ 2..7% VI=- 0.20
i: I=-( Z ~ I~)l o. 20 )~.I-t == 17 1I11l,,1t
::'1' 0.2..7 '
~Nf...J~ \=1..DN
(,...:0 /800' v.;-::- 100;0 n=-O.olb EXHIBIT NO, \) ,
'P. ~ C;f=- 8'. /'
.-=~~~~~.:~~b~~,~~;-~~i .~ -; ,:". L- '
.f, Its- of wi "
". I
" I
,;, i
,
'. ~......1.. _. ,
, ,I
"0 ",'
':: j,
, I
, . ~ .
..
!
II: '"
~ : i .
..
~
a
, , ,.., , " , I If
I.-L.J-f.,~. ,.!...:.... _, . _ . I ,
..; ! ~J'" '. BY...:.-'12J.:;-____DATE 4:"
'. "..;.... -(_I. .
. ....;., ..:,.;., CHKD. BY-:-__DATE__...____...
~ c L.: r - j.;, ~ ~ ':
. . ; ;" .t- .--:--------.--.............-...........
,'" , I
,'(nt'::'.
. ,. ~ 1., _., .',_
, i--' i~:i ; ; :'r'
, ;.L t ' "
; ; "1.'ft. i . ,
. . <.,.\ .
:':-I'H I':
".....l!. .'
... ..\ .
". t It '
: .L~-i '
~+;.{~'!''t ,.:,., : '
: r t 'j. t. , '
!...t'-Tj.1-~.t :
; .~. i ~ ;',
;~.frr!' ,
~ ;
"! ' ,
" ,
, "
.' r<,:',
i.,t E:J ::! ,__: _~ : .
.':'trrl~' :~ :'.~ :
, , . ;! i, '
" i
".i 1
\ '
.',-~ .
, ;'
, ,
." i.
, '
" '
,
.. ..~
. ~.. '
i'rf~l: ~: f ::
-: i.-'t..., ":"
I : "1 r ~."' ~: ' ~ ,
. il.
, ,....J.
,.t.Il' .
': i
t' I
Ii.
~ ,. r,
. :.~.L:: : '
I I
;: I
, i
:' !
i
: ;j
;
:'>n- '
. ,)...ut-. : ' : .
'Li ,'"
;U'I':_ :,;
~ ~.-: ~. _i ~ ; <
Z "_~;'~'hn ,.. _ ,
i r I .; .
.. '.!.,
~ ,;,
.
o
. SUBJECT _...._.__...._.._...._...__._._.. __._._ ......_._...__
'" , .
SHEET NO. _~n.,OF,_":
JOB NO._._______
----...-........-.-...-..-.....-....-..------------....---.-.-...-
....-..-.........-.-.............-.........-.-....-...-..-.--...-.-...-.......... ..-......
C, CAL--0ULATION0 COWT.
{I =. ( 2 'If l&;o;t. o. Ollo)t*
? l' (). 10
= 7 NIN,
1i Nt::.. OF- COWvE:.l<--tr./'Z-AnoN
-t ... n + 1 :.. 24 HI N ,
.A20N ~.( 1L" zot-JE:- 'e;>
. llCl't>:" Z.,C15 (n/hr. F-o 10 ~ 0.70
FIZOH c.+lAI2-T II jZ..'\ /2..ze.;:. 0.82..
tzvN~ rorz-' ~l0TI~ CO~rnotJ0
't:?UI!X UP Af2-EA O.2..C3;1.fX),(o =-~,10
Ut-J, HF'(20YED A~, 0.75)l. eodo -=- ~.45
Q='C,IA ','
'0100::' z.~ (z.o .(&:;" 0/;5';+ 00.45}C O.s:>) .... 101,'2,.0 c"FC:;1
i' ,aZ.5~ /,0E:> (20.16-"0."5+ ~O.45)lo.5D) ~'~Z.q4- c.p::;,
Aff~ 'DBJ~~ COklDrrIO~
, I
, , : I ' 'WA-~t::.t> "~ A:DDE:O ,APia;L PE:V~EWT =
i:., '1,B4-Ac.. (~,:;%oF IOI~ rJAT-SZ0I1e.n) .,
; i
'{;E:.VaOf'~~ ~T Be6 TIe:ufZO~ ~ Pl2oP~T'1
'WI!""/...- I/J~~ e:.U/t...T 'LR ~ I ~IVc.NAj, '
tbU%-, Gr~r:;,.. / y..)AJ.,.j?-0 I e:.::rc....;
,~=- o.Z'7;;.Ac...
CJIA FaZ- ADoev WkrC:/2-~;
I,
Qz,'5:.{).5:)x I,~)C Le4::< I.~ OF'? r----::-:.,-.::-, =~:. '-
QIO::>::' 0.5O)l. '2..05 " I .f1\-:- I.e., CoP'=> ", \LiP of Wl
" ,'~~~,~r~k'!. ~~~5c:?~;:~O): " 0,2.1 ~
" o.2.-;!;- 1,103 It o.,?? lO/?5-D.~) =- 0,/7 OF?
(brA1- DUe... iO 'QE)IE..L.-OPE;..I-v\e,NT AI--lD ADDED'
WM~~E.D ~ \,72. ~Z'5
,,' :. 2./0 c.~loo', .' EXfTIBITNO: D
, : 1>. ? crS?
,\ :
,...:L_ .."--. n.., " "Jr
- ': ;,.,. BY..~t=:::'-__DAT' ~. .. SUBJECT .______......._..._...._..._.. ....... . _...._..
~ ~ -i. ! . ::: CHK D. BY ~___ DA T E .....~._.__~ .' _..........__....__....._._.__._._...__._..._.._.._......==._...~:.~=-..._._
SHEET NO. ..~.._OF__.:
JOB NO.____._._._.__
";-------------....-....-........... ........-.--..-.....----..-..--...--.--.....---__...__"'__n... ..._....
,
1,[ ,
\..-,' ,
: Jfl:-::.
,....1. I ;
.; I.
'L~fl.r' j, : ; ,
:- I,~_,,.. . 1 ' ,.
.4-;. ,..U.1,,:,
~. l"j:'1j:\.t - ;:'.~ ! T :' ".
~...:._ .. I. _. .'...
. !'. t r. l' - ~ .
: ;';, ~~ J ; ; -: ~ .
:; ~-.f -1"1' I '.
',.~' ,. t ' 1-'
: .:. ~''"7-T I
.'~r7.~.'.' .
i'; !
-..11
- ,--;..i-l'
',;1
':1
~!- ! . i
, ~~-F~--f
'. ,
) i
. : j
, ,
, ,
, ,
'-.
,
i
-: ,
, i ~
,
".,; :i'., H
. .tJ:Yi:r:, ;- . : ;
~ /'\" i! ~ . !
; , ;; '! ': " " !' ~
. .... ,...
,::).J) ':
; ~ ; f", ' ' .
:';:': I
; I,' ,
" : I
. i '1""
;_} ~..!.. - I
: :-.! 1.
.----:.-..,
,
. ; ~l
; :;;),
" I
. 1
" ,
.. ....,
. . ~ , .
.....;~.."... ,..'-
"j
~;'
"'; I '
.. : 1 :
.
,"'
z - ~ ", :
i
~
~
'"
~
o
!: :
C, CA\"Wt.ATIOW 0 C:OfJT .
tz.Ut-JQA=- ~ l--1 l1-fe., ~I jZ.€;.. WAT€:JZ-~ WI [..,t.-
I W v~ef\t?E.. er & . I % OV~ \He- ~l2-Eh€-NT
RON f=O\Z- A 2CS YeA\2. qrol2-~
': .
, ,
i
ec~l~ OI2AI\J~~E... ~1L,..IT[E:h
E,X.L&:1fIJ-..l~ CDl-!ul2er1:;. ~ c..uLN~ o!J
i1~V~~ e.vVO ~Y-6 '
a=- 14s~ ~ A )I. ,Ak 7'" )It:;'h,.. 'n:. O.OI~ '5::'0.0{ A"l..A.!
h
C(=- IA730 "15" DPlfo J". 0./0 .:. 11d/. (t7 ot=-'S> .
o.or~ I' '
/01-. b C;PS ,10 ~ CAPA6/1"'f ot:=- eo:>,-
, OUI..N~""
, " c.v'-~, ~1' /" Gf~EA~ -rttA1-.t E.X~TII-J~
.;, ',tz.V/oJo~ (104,~ / ~/~) :FolZ: 2-'5 \'e:A1<=- ~H'
~\D Gf~~ 1itAW P~?~ rz.tn...JOPF-
": .,', (I~b '184n) Fo!2- zs ~iZ-' ~1Z-t---I
j .: , ~
i:
~ j ;.
~c..<Ju.vep:r c.A?AG1T-f I'? Gl\Z.~T~ TH~ ~'?lI1-Jq
~lJOFF (104-.(0> lol.'Z..) Faz.. lOOI'f!-, i?T"Otz,K
AtJP G.,l2-eA:""~ ~ PfZ.OPo%:D ?{)lJo~
( 10+.rp;> IO??) ~ (coYF-. 0TD~
:~;'~-"!,,"_U.---=--'."'i :'~',~. ~
-'"----"----'-- . ~- . <.-' ---
r. II 7 01=- It "f
EXHIBIT NO. 1)
p, 8 o~ 8'
TIBURON FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
1679 TIBURON BOULEVARD, TIBURON, CALIFORNIA 94920
TELEPHONE: (415) 435-7200 FAX: (415) 435-7205
, 7
." ~'. i
~\P\:
~\Qr~ '~
14 b~m6er 1996
RECEftVED
DEe 1 7 1996
OSEMARY BLISS, FIRE CHIEF
Dbwn and Sharon Power
885 B Tiburon Blvd
Tiburon, CA 94920
re: Minor subdivision of APN 55-261-1I
TOWN OF TIBURON
PlANNING & BUILDING DEFT.
Mr. and Mrs. Pov.~~
Thank you for the opportUnity to review the proposed minor subdivision of APN 55-26I-II at
885 Tiburon Blvd. The project will be required to comply with the following sections of the
Uniform Fire Code and Ordinance #117 of the Tiburon Fire Protection District:
I.
Access roads to each new lot shall not be less than 12 feet unobstructed
width with a maximum 18% grade; they shall be constructed with an all-
weather driving surface, capable of supporting the impased loads of fire
apparatus and having a minimum of 13 feet, 6 inches of vertical clearance.
UFC 10.203
Access roads in excess af 150 feet shall be provided with an appraved
turnaround. UFC 10.203
Any gates shall be equipped with emergency access for fire apparatus,
I recommend a Kt'JOX key system. UFC 10.302
An approved water supply (water main and new hydrant) shall be installed
at the base of the driveway serving Lot 3 (accessed from Stony Hill). _
UFC 10.401
2.
3'
4.
All roadway and water requirements shall be completed prior to any sidewall construction an
the site. There is a fee for the review of this project, an invoice has been enclosed.
Please call me ar my office, 435-7200, if you have any questions. Thank you for your attention
to this matter.
Sincerely;
Michael Ayers, Captain
Fire Prevention Bureau
cc: Dan Watrous
Bracken & Keane
\
;--,",--..-.,.-.,:,.. .".. '1....-
---_._._-_._--'.:~ ~ .\. . ......~_._-
1>, ue of It'1
EXHIBIT NO, C
PROTECTING THE COMMUNITIES OF BELVEDERE AND TIBURON
,)
MARIN MUNICIPAL
WATER DISTRICT
R~)r=."eD
DEe 2 3 1996
TOWN OF TIBURON
PlANNING & BUILDING DEFT.
ZZO Nellen Avenue
Corte Madera, CA 949Z5-1169
415,9Z4,46OCJ
FAX 415,9Z7.4953
Daniel M, Watrous
Tiburon Planning Department
1155 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
December 19, 1996
File No. 244.1
Service No. 59636, 59637
Map No. N21-11
RE: WATER AVAILABILITY - Minor Subdivision
Assessor's Parcel No.: 55-261-11
Location: 855 B, C & D, Tiburon Boulevard
Dear Mr. Watrous
Water is currently being provided to the above referenced parcel by service nos. 5936 and
59637, According to District records, the purpose and intent of each of these services are
to provide water to a Single-family residence. Lot 3, created by the proposed lot split, does
not have an allocation of water, nor does it meet the conditions for service as set forth by
the District. These conditions state in part: ''the property must be fronted by a water main;
the structure must be within 125 feet of the water main". Service to this property will,
therefore, require approval of a variance for water service from the District's Board of
Directors. Should the District's Board of Directors grant such a variance, this property will
then be eligible for water service upon request and fulfillment of the requirements listed
below.
1. Complete a High Pressure Water Service Application.
2. Submit a copy of the building permit.
3. Pay appropriate fees.
4. Complete the structure's foundation within 120 days of the date of application.
5. Comply with the District's rules and regulations in effect at the time service is
requested.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Keith Vincent of our
engineering staff at 924-4600, extension 236.
Very truly yours,
0~~~J.b~~
Jim Mistron 0', ., ", Z-
Project Manager _______.o,'ou._. . ,- , -- .....--,._
fI, Il'1 of IL~
EXh-rn31T NO.-E..
KV:js
An Equal Opportunityl Affirmative Action Employtr
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
DIXON AND SHARON POWER MINOR SUBDIVISION
FILE # 69602
885 B, C & D TmURON BOULEVARD
Geologic Hazards
Mitisation Measure:
l.g.l. Pilings or other reinforcements to the structural integrity of the proposed house shall
be constructed beyond the depth of the underlying landslide or debris flow deposits
in conformance with the recommendations of the geotechnical investigation prepared
by Earth Science Consultants.
Implementation Procedure:
Construction drawings submitted by applicant for building permit must show proposed
structural integrity reinforcements acceptable to the Town Engineer. Responsibility of
Building Official to ensure plans contain this information and that it has been approved by
the Town Engineer. Actual installation of approved structural integrity measures shall be
confirmed by the Building Official prior to final inspection and sign off on the building
and/or grading permit.
Non-compliance Sanction:
No issuance of building permit if structural integrity measures are not shown on plans; no
final sign off if structural integrity measures not installed; halt construction; fines.
Mitiiation Measure
l.g.2. All structural. architectural and mechanical details of proposed construction shall be
designed to resist earthquake groundshaking, as recommended by the prepared
geotechnical investigation.
TTl1Plementation Procedure:
Construction drawings submitted by applicant for building permit must show proposed
structural integrity reinforcements acceptable to the Town Engineer and other mechanical
and architectural reinforcements acceptable to the Building Official Responsibility of
Building Official to ensure plans contain this information and that structural integrity
reinforcements have been approved by the Town Engineer. Actual installation of approved
structural integrity measures and other mechanical and architectural improvements shall be
confirmed by the Building Official prior to final inspection and sign off on the building
and/or grading permit.
EXHIBIT NO. -3
? I oF S-
Non-com'pliance Sanction'
No issuance of building permit if structural integrity measures and mechanical and
architectural reinforcements are not shown on plans; no final sign off if these measures and
reinforcements not installed; halt construction; fines.
Air Ouality
Mitigation Measure'
2.a.l. The site shall be watered during construction to reduce the impacts of such dust to
acceptable levels.
Implementation Procedure:
The Building Inspector shall observe the site during all inspections for evidence of watering
or fugitive dust.
Non-coll1Pliance Sanction'
Failure to comply with site watering requirements or observation of fugitive dust will result
in the issuance of correction notices, citations, a project stop-work order, or other available
enforcement methods.
Water Ouality
Mitigation Measure:
3.e.l. Project design and construction activities will utilize Best Management Practices as
described in the California Storm Water Best Management Practice Handbook for
Construction Activity, March, 1993.
Tll!Plementation Procedure:
BMP program to be approved by Town Engineer prior to issuance of building or grading
permits. Implementation ofBMP program shall be by the contractor, under review of the
Town Engineer.
Non-coll1Pliance Sanction'
Failure to comply with the approved construction BMP's will result in the issuance of
correction notices, citations, a project stop-work order, or other available enforcement
methods.
EXHIBIT NO. 3
~. '2.- cF S-
~
Mitif:ation Measure'
6.a.l. All construction activity shall comply with the Town's limitations on construction
hours to prevent noise impacts during nighttime.
Implementation Procedure:
Ensure contractor and any sub-contractors are aware of the Town's limited construction
hours, including those for use of heavy equipment. Building Inspector shall ensure that
these appear on the job card. Building Inspector and Police Department to enforce this
measure.
Non-co1llj)liance Sanction:
Police Department and/or Building Inspector to issue citations and/or halt construction.
Emergency Re$ponse
Miti~ation Measure:
10.b.l.
Access roads to each new lot shall be not less than 12 feet unobstructed width
with a maximum 18% grade; they shall be constructed with an all-weather
driving surface, capable of supporting the imposed loads of ('Ire apparatus and
having a minimum of 13 feet, 6 inches of vertical clearance.
TTJ1j)lementation Procedure'
Construction drawings submitted by applicant for building permit must show proposed
construction details of all access roads, including grade, width, paving materials and vertical
clearance, Responsibility of Building Official to ensure plans contain this information.
Actual construction of approved access roads shall be confirmed by the Building Official
prior to final inspection and sign off on the building and/or grading permit.
Non-compliance Sanction'
No issuance of building permit if detailed access road plans are not shown on plans; no final
sign off if access road not properly constructed; halt construction; fines.
Mitigation Measure:
10.b.2,
Access roads in excess of 150 feet shall be provided with an approved
turnaround.
EXHIBIT NO. 3
P. ~ Dr:; 5'
hnplementation Procedure.
Construction drawings submitted by applicant for building permit must show proposed
access road turnaround acceptable to the Tiburon Fire Protection District. Responsibility
of Building Official to ensure plans contain this information and that it has been approved
by the Fire District. Actual construction of approved turnaround shall be confirmed by the
Building Official prior to final inspection and sign off on the building and/or grading permit.
Non-compliance Sanction'
No issuance of building permit if adequate access road turnaround is not shown on plans;
no final sign off if turnaround not constructed; halt construction; fines.
Mitisation Measure:
lO.b.3.
Any gates shall be equipped witb emergency fIre access for fire apparatus.
hn.vlementation Procedure:
Construction drawings submitted by applicant for building permit must show any proposed
gates. All such gates must show emergency fire access equipment acceptable to the Tiburon
Fire Protection District. Responsibility of Building Official to ensure plans contain this
information and that it has been approved by the Fire District. Actual installation of
emergency fire access equipment on gates shall be confirmed by the Building Official prior
to final inspection and sign off on the building and/or grading permit.
Non-compliance Sanction.
No issuance of building permit if any gates shown on plans do not include appropriate
emergency fire access equipment; no final sign off if such equipment not installed on gates;
halt construction; fines.
Mitigation Measure:
1O.b.4.
An approved water supply, including water main and new hydrant, shall be
installed at the base of the driveway serving the lot accessed from Stony Hill
Road.
TTl1P lementation Procedure:
Construction drawings submitted by applicant for building permit must show proposed
water main and hydrant acceptable to the Tiburon Fire Protection District. Responsibility
of Building Official to ensure plans contain this information and that it has been approved
by the Fire District. Actual installation of approved water main and hydrant shall be
confirmed by the Building Official prior to final inspection and sign off on the building
EXHIBIT NO. 3
\/. 4 OF !)
and/or grading permit.
Non-compliance Sanction:
No issuance of building permit ifnew water main and hydrant are not shown on plans; no
final sign off if water main and hydrant not installed; halt construction; fines.
Aesthetics
Mitigation Measure:
18.1. Prior to the issuance of grading or building permits for the proposed single-family
home, the building design and landscaping shall receive Site Plan and Architectural
Review approval pursuant to Section 4.02.00 of the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance. The
building and landscaping shall be designed so as to minimize and effectively mitigate
visual impacts to the surrounding residential neighborhood.
Implementation Procedure:
The Tiburon Design Review Board shall review the submitted building and landscaping
plans to insure that visual impacts on surrounding residences are minimi"ed and effectively
mitigated. The Building official shall not accept plans for building plan check nor issue
building permits without verification that the proposed building has received Site Plan and
Architectural Review approval by the Design Review Board.
Non-colI!Pliance Sanction:
Building permits shall not be issued without proof of Site Plan and Architectural Review
approval; no final sign offiflandscaping and building is not completed in compliance with
said approval; halt construction; fines.
EXl:-IIBIT NO. 3
'P. 5 o~ 5'
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REPORT
To: TOWN COUNCIL
ITEM NO.
From: DANIEL M. WATROUS, SENIOR PLANNER
Subject: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO DENY A
REQUEST TO DIVIDE ONE PARCEL INTO THREE LOTS
MINOR SUBDIVISION #69602 - 885 B, C & D TIBURON BOULEVARD
Date: AUGUST 6, 1997
APPLICANT/APPELLANT - DIXON AND SHARON POWER
PRO.TECT DATA:
ADDRESS:
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.:
FILE NUMBER:
ZONING:
GENERAL PLAN:
LOT SIZE:
CURRENT USE:
OWNER:
APPLICANT:
DATE COMPLETE:
CEQA EXEMYfION:
BACKGROUND:
885 B, C & D TffiURON BOULEVARD
55-261-11
69602
R-1 (SINGLE FAJ'iILY RESIDENTIAL)
MEDIUM mGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
41,569 SQUARE FEET
SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING AND DUPLEX
DIXON AND SHARON POWER
SAME
DECEMBER 1, 1996
DECEMBER 1, 1996
On May 28, 1997, the Planning Commission denied a Minor Subdivision application to divide one
parcel into three lots on property located at 885 B, C & D Tiburon Boulevard. The applicants,
Dixon and Sharon Power, have now appealed the Commission's denial to the Town Council,
TO\Ml of Tiburoo
Staff Rq:lOrt
8/6/97
tc69602.:lp1
EXHIBIT NO.~
p, I DrY:'
Page 2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The proposal involves the subdivision of one parcel into three lots for property located at 885 B,
C & D Tiburon Boulevard. This property is currently developed with a single-family dwelling and
a duplex. Both structures were constructed prior to incorporation of the Town ofTiburon. The
use of the property is legal nonconforming.
The site has an area of 41,569 square feet (0.95 acres). The proposal would create three separate
lots, The single-family dwelling would be situated on an 11,324 square foot lot (Lot 1). Lot 2,
which would contain the duplex, would have an area of 10,245 square feet. The third lot would
have an area of20,000 square feet, and could be developed with a single-family dwelling of up to
4,000 square feet in size in the future,
As shown on the originally submitted plans (Exhibit 11), the two existing buildings on the site
have access to Tiburon Boulevard by utilizing a private street (recently named "Las Palmas Way")
which serves 1 0 other neighboring parcels, Access to the proposed Lot 3 was originally proposed
to be provided from Stony Hill Road to the north by a 540 foot long driveway within an existing
access easement extending across an undeveloped 5,6 acre parcel to the north, This parcel is
referred to as the "Tai" property in the Tiburon General Plan, Future development of the Tai
property, with up to six lots, would either need to be designed around this driveway or provide
alternate access for Lot 3,
REVIEW BY THE COMMISSION:
The Planning Commission reviewed this application at its April 9 and May 14, 1997, meetings.
The Commission's review centered on issues of access, land use compatibility, density and views,
The length of the proposed driveway to Lot 3 and its path through undeveloped property raised
concerns about the appropriateness of this access for a single additional dwelling, Questions were
also raised about the availability and condition of Las Palmas Way and the safety of turning
movements at its intersection with Tiburon Boulevard.
Comparisons were made between the proposed lot sizes and those of other parcels in the
surrounding area, Although the sizes of the proposed Lots 1 & 2 were consistent with many of
the neighboring parcels along Tiburon Boulevard, most of the parcels to the north of the site are
much larger than any of the three proposed lots.
The fact that three dwelling units already existed on this property, and that a fourth would be
created, raised concerns about the overall density of development on the site. The Commission
suggested that a total of three dwelling units could be appropriate for the entire site, but that four
units would overcrowd the property,
Town ofTiburoo
Staff Report
8/6197
tc69602.apl
EXHIBIT No.L
P. 2. oP8'
Page 3
Consideration was given to the impact of the house which would be constructed on the proposed
Lot 3 on the views of the neighboring house located at I Owlswood Road. This adjacent home
has views to the west of Richardson Bay which could be obscured by the construction of even a
low profile home on the proposed Lot 3.
At the April 9, 1997, meeting, the Planning Commission continued the item to the May 14
meeting, with the following direction to the applicant:
Access to the proposed Lot 3 from Stony Hill Road was totally unacceptable at
this time; therefore, acceptable access from Tiburon Boulevard was to be
established. The nature of any improvements to the private street serving the site
were to be detailed, and the plans reviewed by the Tiburon Fire District.
A building envelope was to be established for the future home on Lot 3. The
envelope was to be created to minimi7e the view impacts on neighboring residents,
and respecting setback and drainage requirements, Story poles were to be erected
around this proposed envelope, colored at the first and second story elevations and
with string tied between the poles to give a better idea of the bulk of the house.
Details were to be provided of the existing and proposed size of the structures on
the proposed Lots I & 2,
The construction of another dwelling on the property would require the conversion
of the duplex to a single-family residence.
The applicant submitted revised plans for the project prior to the May 14 meeting (Exhibit 12),
These plans showed the access to the proposed Lot 3 from Las PaImas Way (see ExInbits 24 &
27). The revised site plan showed the location of a garage on Lot 3 which could be served by a
driveway connecting to Las PaImas Way, with the future possibility of taking access from Stony
Hill Road across the Tai property, The submitted plans indicated that vegetation at the street
entrance would be trimmed to provide better visibility for traffic turning onto Tiburon Boulevard,
but proposed no other specific improvements to Las PaImas Way. The Tiburon Fire District
reviewed the revised plans, and found them to be generally acceptable, if certain improvements
were made.
Story poles were erected on the proposed Lot 3 at the boundaries of the building envelope for a
future house on this parcel, The applicant revised the locations of the poles after evaluating their
original position with the neighbors at I Owlswood Road, Although the proposed building
envelope pushed the future house site into the northwest comer of the site, the poles were still
clearly visible from the indoor and outdoor living areas of the neighboring home.
Town ofTiburcn
StaffRep(Jrt
8/6/97
to69602,apl
EXHIBIT NO. t.f
<r 3~~
Page 4
A summary was also presented for the sizes of the existing structures on the site (Exhibit 21).
The single-family home currently has 1,031 square feet of floor area, with plans for a 600 square
foot addition submitted for Design Review approval, and another 400 square foot addition
anticipated in the future. The duplex has 3,000 square feet of floor area, with no plans for any
additions, No plans were required to be submitted for the potential conversion of the duplex,
The proposed home on Lot 3 would be 4,000 square feet in size, with an additianal 500 square
foot garage,
Public testimony was received at each of the Planning Commission meetings regarding the
proposed subdivision, The primary objections came from the residents of 1 Owlswood Road,
whose concerns centered on view impacts and density concerns, A petition was submitted which
was signed by 28 neighboring residents opposing the requested subdivision (Exhibit 19),
On May 14, 1997, the Planning Commission reviewed the revised plans and heard additional
public testimony, The Commission concluded that the application was inconsistent with the
Town's policies regarding re-subdivision of existing developed lots. General Plan Policy LV-
19( e) discourages re-subdivision of existing developed lots unless the "proposed lot sizes and
density are compatible with surrounding pattern of development and the characteristics of the
subject property are comparable with those of surrounding properties." The density which would
be created by the development of a house on the proposed Lot 3, combined with the existing
single-family home on proposed Lots 1 and the existing duplex on proposed Lot 2, was found to
be incompatible with the density of the surrounding neighborhood, General Plan Policy LU-19
(a) further discourages re-subdivision unless "acceptable access can be readily provided," The
access! egress via Las Palmas Way was not considered appropriate for the development of a new
single-family home, General Plan Policy LV-3 states that "the Town shall closely consider the
environmental constraints ofland through the development review process in determining the
location, type, and density of development." Story poles erected to illustrate the location of a
potential house on the proposed Lot 3 revealed that the revised building envelope for the
proposed Lot 3 would still result in the development of a house which would have significant
view and privacy impacts on surrounding residents. Because of the incompatibility with these
policies, the Planning Commission could not make the findings required by Section 14-3,6 of the
Tiburon Subdivision Ordinance to approve a Minor Subdivision. These policies and required
findings are attached as Exhibit 8, On this basis, the Planning Commission denied the requested
subdivision, as set forth in Resolution 97-11 (Exhibit 2),
BASIS FOR THE APPEAL:
The applicant's appeal (Exhibit l) of the Planning Commission's decision centers on four of the
findings which were made in denying the Minor Subdivision:
Tov.n ofTihuroo
Staff Report
8/6/97
tc69602.apl
EXHIBIT NO. L/
p, l..{ {;f- ~
Page 5
1. Inconsistency with General Plan Policy LU-19 (e) ("Re-subdivision of existing legal lots
shall be discouraged unless proposed lot sizes and density are cOll1PatJ."ble with
surrounding pattern of development and the characteristics of the suQject prQperty are
cOlI!Parable with those of surrounding properties, ")
The appeal contends that the lot sizes for proposed Lots I & 2 are consistent with those
of the parcels to the south of the site, and that the proposed Lot 3 is similar in size to
other parcels to the north. The appellant was originally reluctant to convert the existing
duplex to a single-family home, and asked the Planning Commission at the May 9 meeting
to allow the duplex to remain for at least five years. The applicant has now agreed to this
conversion, keeping the number of dwelling units on the site at three. The appeal states
that this would make both the lot sizes and density comparable to that of the surrounding
area,
ReiiPonse'
The subject property lies in a transitional area between the smaller parcels along Tiburon
Boulevard and the larger parcels on the hillsides above the site, The size of the proposed
Lots I & 2 are similar to those of the parcels to the south. Although many of the larger
parcels to the north and east of the proposed Lot 3 are similar in size, many others have
sizes ranging from 25,000 square feet up to over an acre, which are substantially larger
than the 20,000 square foot area proposed for Lot 3.
The site is in a transitional location between neighborhoods of smaller and larger parcels.
However, most of the nearby homes on larger parcels are situated in lower density areas
than that of the subject property, and do not include lots developed with duplexes.
Converting the duplex to a single-family home would make the density of the property
more comparable to that of these surrounding areas.
2. Inconsistency with General Plan Policy LU-19 (a) ("Re-subdivision of existing lelfallots
shall be discouralfed unless" .acc~table access can be readily provided, ")
The appeal states that the revised access for the proposed Lot 3 utilizing Las Palmas Way
was considered to be acceptable to the Tiburon Fire District and was supported by Staff in
its May 14 report to the Commission. The appeal also claims that there was no consensus
amongst the Planning Commission regarding the inappropriateness of this access,
ReiiPonse'
The Planning Commission determined that even though the access to the proposed Lot 3
via Las Palmas Way was preferable to the long driveway leading to Stony Hill Road, this
Town ofTiburm
Staff Rq)(Jrt
8/6/97
tc6960:2.apl
EXI-IYBITNO, 4-
'J 5 OF?
Page 6
access was still not appropriate for the construction of a new single-family home on this
site, Staff acknowledged in the May 14 report (Exhibit 4) that the use of Las Pa1mas Way
provided more direct access to Lot 3 than the driveway leading to Stony Hill Road.
However, Las Pahnas Way is poorly maintained, and provides, at best, indirect access to
Lot 3. To reach this site, vehicles would need to follow a zig-zagging path which cuts
across not only the proposed Lots I & 2 but also another private parcel before reaching
Lot 3. 1bis type of access is not consistent 'With that provided for the other new homes on
larger parcels to which the proposed house for Lot 3 is being compared.
In addition, the Planning Commission noted the difficnlty in making left turns onto
Tiburon Boulevard from the end of Las Pahnas Way, 1bis current situation was described
as dangerous, and would again not meet the standards that are customarily expected for a
high quality new single-family residence in this area.
3. Inconsistency 'With General Plan Policy LU-3 ("The Town shall closely consider the
environmental constraints ofland through the development review process in det"nninin g
the location type. and density of development, ")
The appeal claims that the view and privacy concerns raised by the Planning Commission
and the neighboring residents of I Owlswood Road are not significant, The story poles
erected at the request of the Commission at the boundaries of a reduced building envelope
for the proposed Lot 3 represent a volume larger than that which would be occupied by an
actual house on the site, Further, the views from the neighboring house which would be
impacted are described as "a partial, secondary view to the west of a neighbor's tree and
an occluded view ofMt. Tam."
Re~onse:
The Planning Commission spent much of its deliberation on this project discussing the
potential view and privacy impacts which would be caused by the construction of a single-
family house on the proposed Lot 3, The story poles were most visible from the living
room and breakfast nook of the neighboring house, and from a patio area bordering the
subject property, The Commission felt that the proposed house would seriously impact
the privacy of the neighbors by visually intruding into these more personal residential
spaces,
The heightened visibility of the future house from the adjacent property would also
diminish a significant portion of the existing views enjoyed by the neighboring residents.
The house at 1 Owlswood Road does not possess sweeping views of Richardson Bay and
other areas to the west, but rather has what is described by these neighbors as a 45 degree
view, Principle 7 (E) of the Tiburon Hillside Design Guidelines (ExlnlJit 9) states that "a
Town ofTiburm
Staff Report
8/6/97
lc69602.apl
F~;"'1:JTkTT ,,-TO '-J
.L:...tl~...L.i..-<-~l -~ .
f. ro CF r
Page 7
wide panoramic view can accept more view blockage than the smaller slot view." The
Planning Commission found that the intrusion of the future house into the already
restricted view of the neighbor's house would result in an unacceptable view blockage for
these residents. There was some discussion about limiting the house on the proposed Lot
3 to one story in height to reduce these view impacts, but the applicant indicated that such
a house was not desirable, as the house would not have the same views enjoyed by most
of the surrounding homes,
It is strongly recommended that all Council members view the story poles from the house
at I Owlswood Road to ascertain for themselves the extent of privacy impacts and view
blockage which would be caused by the construction of a house on the proposed Lot 3,
4. The project would not promote the public health safety or welfare, nor on balance further
the goals and policies of the General Plan with respect to re-subdivision of already
developed lots
The appeal states that there is no evidence on the record that the proposed project would
be detrimental to public health, safety, and welfare. The drainage, biological and
geotechnical reports prepared by the applicant address safety concerns, and contain
mitigation measures that would insure that the project would not have any significant
impacts on neighboring properties, The appeal also contends that the project would
provide a public benefit by making improvements to the existing private street and
increasing the Town's property tax base.
Response:
The Planning Commission determined that the project would not be an overall benefit to
the Town ofTiburon and would not be considered "good planning" under current policies
and planning principles, The Commission concluded that the proposed lots were too
small, and their eventual ultimate development would overcrowd this site. VehicuIar
access to the subdivision would clearly be substandard, Combined with the view and
privacy impacts which would be caused by the construction of a house on the proposed
Lot 3, these concerns were deemed to be inconsistent with the policies of the Land Use
Element of the Tiburon General Plan for the resubdivision of existing legal lots.
STAFF RECOMMENDA nON:
1. Deny the appeal.
2. Direct Staff to return with a Resolution memorializing the action of the Council,
Tov.n ofTihuroo
St:rlfReport
8/6197
tc69602.apl
EX1-iIHIT NO,-L
~. 7 DF,?
Page 8
EXHTRITS:
1. Notice of Appeal filed July 9, 1997
2. Resolution No. 97-11, denying Minor Subdivision No. 96902, dated May 28, 1997
3. Planning Commission Staffreport dated April 9, 1997
4, Planning Commission Staff report dated May 14, 1997
5, Minutes of the April 9, 1997, Planning Commission meeting
6. Minutes of the May 14, 1997, Planning Commission meeting
7, Minutes of the May 28,1997, Planning Commission meeting
8. Selected portions of the Land Use Element of the Tiburon General Plan and Section 14-
3.6 of the Tiburon Subdivision Ordinance
9. Principle 7 (E) ofthe Tiburon Hillside Design Guidelines
10, Application form and additional submittal information
11. Site Pian dated December 13, 1996
12, Revised site plan and driveway access plan dated May 7, 1997
13. Letter from Dr. Ann-Marie Meagher, M.D" dated February 23, 1997
14, Letter from Leroy L. and Elizabeth H Little, dated March 10, 1997
15, Letter from Kent N, Allen, dated March 11, 1997
16, Letter from John and Ann Gigounas, dated March 11, 1997
17, Letter from Julien LE. Hoffinan, M.D., and Kathleen W. Lewis, M.D" dated March 24,
1997
18, Letter from Allan N, Littman, dated March 25, 1997
19, Petition opposing the proposed request, dated March 28, 1997
20, Letters from Dixon and Sharon Power, dated April 4, 1997
21, Additional submittal information dated May 2, 1997
22. Letters from Dixon and Sharon Power, dated May 5 & 6, 1997
23. Letter from Earth Science Consultants, dated May 5, 1997
24. Letter from Fred and Ruth Mantegani, dated April 28, 1997
25, Letter from Lam Odland, dated May 7, 1997
26, Letter from Leroy L. and Elizabeth H Little, dated May 9, 1997
27, Letter from Fred and Ruth Mantegani, dated May 9, 1997
28, Letter from Dixon and Sharon Power, dated May 10, 1997
29, Letter from Frank Bonardi, dated May 13, 1997
30, Letter from Charles 1. Gallagher, dated May 14, 1997
31. Draft Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration
32, Draft Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Town ofTibmoo.
Staff R~ort
8/6/97
C:\REPORTS\TC69602,APL
tc69602.apl
EXHFUT NO,~
p. g- bF1(
[F~[L~ @@[P)W
Dual Annexatian Policy far Purposes afProcessing a Lot Split Applicatian - (Accept Lands &
Develapment Subcommittee Recommendatian)
6) New Town Hall - Interior Improvements - (Accept Town Manager's Report)
Cauncil added the following items:
11) Donahue Building - Landmark's Society Restoration and Repair
12) Harroman Praperty - Authorize Execution of Documents concerning Payment on the Note
and Canveyance afPraperty to the Marin County Open Space District - (Adapt Resolutian)
Council member Ginalski noted that the Town should be very proud of the campletion ofItem 12,
Council member Waif corrected page 2 of the July 2, 1997 minutes, spelling Romberg Center's
Director Lisa Arp's name, This change was in addition to amendments made to the June 18, July
2 and July 16 minutes by Mayor Hennessy (see attached Exhibit A.)
MOTION
Moved:
Vote:
To Adopt Consent Calendar, as Amended Above
Ginalski, Seconded by Wolf
AYES Unanimous
ABSENT Hennessy, Thayer
F. PUBLIC HEARING
7) Appeal of Design Review Board Decisian Re: Approved Plans for Chimney Caps and Color
Modifications at 10 St, Bernard Lane - Mr, & Mrs. Allan Fingerhut, Owners; Hill Haven
Homeowners' Association, et a!., Appellants - (Continuedfrom July 16)
Mrs, Rose Fingerhut said the neighbors thought the current brown color was okay, Acting Mayor
Thompson reiterated Council's determinatian that it would reconsider the matter only ifboth the
applicants and appellants submitted something in writing indicating agreement had been reached,
Planning Director Anderson said nothing had been received by Town Staff.
MOTION:
Moved:
Vote
To adopt Resolution as Previously Passed,
Ginalski, Seconded by Thompson
AYES Unanimous
ABSENT Hennessy, Thayer
'7
8) Appeal of Planning Commission' Decision denying Minor Subdivision No 69602 at 885B, C &
D Tiburon Boulevard (Lot Split) - AP#55-261-1l; Dixon and Sharon Power,
Applicant! Appellant
Senior Planner Watrous presented the Staff report, noting the Planning Commission had cited
issues of access, land use compatibility, density and views when making its decision to deny the
application, Watrous said there was currently a single family home and a duplex an the parcel,
and said that Applicants had revised their plan to convert the duplex and build instead on
Town Council.\Jinutes #1119
August 6, 1997
2
"'--r,--.,...,,-m ... T""' C'
P:" -'j "..I ! 1'.:1' '7
........L:L...t._..'\..______ ,v"
f, l~~
proposed Lot 3, which was in the view line ofa home on Owlswaad Lane,
Watrous said the appeal argued four points:
That the lats were consistent with size in the neighborhood, some being larger and some
smaller;
That the Fire District had said it would be okay to subdivide if Las Palmas Way was
impraved;
That the view and privacy concerns of the neighbors were not significant;
That the Planning Commission was incorrect in its assessment of the praject as
inconsistent with the policies of the General Plan or with the health, safety & welfare of
the community,
Dixon ("Toby) Power, Applicant, introduced Planning Consultant Brenda Gilardi who asked
Council to reconsider the Planning Commission's decision, She said the Applicants were willing
to bring Las Palmas way up to standard and that they had purchased the lot with the knowledge
that there was an easement access to Stony Hill Road,
Ms, Gilardi showed photos of the Owlswood neighborhaod, and said the proposed home would
be 140 feet from the edge of the closest [Owlswood] house. and that the view from that house
was not a sweeping view of Richardson Bay
Warren Callister, speaking on behalf of Applicant, said he was excited about the project (which he
named "Sharon Court") because it embodied mixed use housing and added affardable housing
stock to the community, Callister detailed improvements to and widening of the street and said a
beautiful house could be built which respected the views of the neighbors by burying part of the
house into the ground,
During public hearing, Betsy Little, I Owlswood Road, said she had not seen any of the drawings
presented by Callister, and said the proposed house was too big and the development too dense,
Ms Little said it was only a matter of time before the site would contain three huge houses,
.'
Roy Little, 1 Owlswood Road, said that once the story poles were erected in May, the house seen
from all angles was "a looming structure" which adversely impacted his views and privacy,
,Allan Littman, said the project would create excessive density,
Robert Knapp, 2 Owlswood Road, ~aid he would look down on the back of the project and would
see the back ends of the homes and garage doors, In addition, he said he would have to see
asphalt along the total length of the proposed road
John Gigenes, 840 Stony Hill Road, said he objected to a long driveway connecting to Stony Hill
Road
Council member Wolf asked Warren Callister ifit was possible to make the house one story since
Town CVlIllcil .~/lnllles:= J I /<J
.~lIgIlS( 15, /997
J
-
E--T-"--n-rr ~ Tr'. .....
,,'-':-1,....', I',," -'
, ..:.;\.....c...:.........;'-.)~ -. ..:. ~ ....,.
f. Z Df 3
twa of the Planning Commissioners said they would approve it on that basis,
Callister replied that one story of the propased house was in the ground, resulting in 16 feet above
ground which would be visible to the Littles,
During rebuttal, Mr Power said he had gone way out of his way to accommadate his neighbars
by reducing the size of the building envelope and burying the house, and that the one-story
request was unfair Mr Power said the density contention was wrong in that 80% of the
neighborhood had smaller lots
Acting Mayar Thompson closed the public hearing,
Councilmember Wolf said she agreed with the twa Planning Commissioners who had asked that
the hause be lower but said she thought that the 16 foot height was okay,
Councilmember Ginalski said it was not the purview of the Council to redesign projects and that
the Planning Commission had done a thoughtful analysis, Ginalski said the issues were not just
views, but rather ingress/egress and density,
Councilmember Wolf said that the May 14, 1997 Staff Report had said the project was compatible
with the Town's density guidelines [LU#19] but the issue was to keep the project from being too
"bulky" and in keeping with the neighborhoad,
Councilmember Thompson said he would vote to deny the appeal.
Moved:
Vote
To Deny the Appeal of the Planning Commission Decision Denying
Minor Subdivision No 69602 at 885B, C & D Tiburon Boulevard (Lot Split),
Ginalski, Thompson
A YES Ginalski, Thompson
NOES, Wolf
ABSENT- Hennessy, Thayer
MOTION
9) New Police Building Program -
A) Ordinance Establishing Planning Procedures for Proposed Police Station at 1101
Tiburon Boulevard - (Second Reading & Adoption)
Acting Mayor Thompson opened and closed the public hearing, There was no public camment
MOTION
Moved:
Vote
To Read Ordinance By Title Only,
Ginalski, Seconded by Thompson
AYES Unanimous
ABSENT- Hennessy, Thayer
Acting Mayor Thompson read, "An Ordinance of the Town Council of the Tawn ofTiburon
Town Council J.rIinules ;; 1119
August 6, /997
4
EXHIBIT NO, 5"
r, ? a:: ~
TOWN OF TIBURON
STAFF REpORT
To:
From:
Subject:
Date:
ITEM NO. 12
MAYORANDTOWNCOUNC~
ANN R. DANFORTH, TOWN ATTORNEY
ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT TO ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE
May 6, 1998
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
The Town af Tiburon has previously adopted by reference the County of Marin's animal control
ardinances in their entirety, as have all other cities and towns in Marin County. On
November 4, 1997, the Caunty Baard of Supervisors amended the County Code to prohibit the
housing of wild or undomesticated animals in areas zoned for residential use. The amendment
arose from an increase in the importation of such animals into the County's residential areas. The
new code sections were drafted by the staff of the Marin Humane Society, County Counsel, the
County Community Development Agency and the County Administrator. The County Animal
Control Advisory Commission strongly recommends that the cities and towns of Marin County
adopt the County's amendments in the interests of uniform enforcement.
The Council held a public hearing on this ordinance and passed first reading at its meeting of
April 15, 1998.
RECOMMF,NnA nON
It is recommended that the Council: 1) conduct a public hearing on this matter; 2) by motion read
the ordinance by title only; and 3) hold second reading and adopt the ordinance by roll call vote.
EXHmITS
1. Draft Town Ordinance
2. Memorandum from the Marin County Administrator's Office
3. County Ordinance
ORDINANCE NO.
N,S,
()..>,
'"' " ,
~rf
AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF TIDURON ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE
AMENDED ANIMAL CONTROL REGULATIONS OF
TITLE 8 OF THE MARIN COUNTY CODE ADDING
SECTIONS 8,04,184, 8.04.184.1, AND 8.04,184.2
PERTAINING TO THE PROHIBITION OF THE HOUSING
OF ANY WILD OR UNDOMESTICATED ANIMAL
IN AN AREA ZONED RESIDENTIAL
The Town Council of the Town ofTiburon daes ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. Sectian 20-1 of the Tiburon Municipal Cade is hereby amended to read
as follows:
Section 20-1
Adootion of County Code
Pursuant to Government Code Section 50022.9, the Marin County Animal Control
Regulations set forth in Title 8 of the Marin County Cade as Chapter 8,04, including all
current amendments thereto, and adding Sections 8.04,184, 8,04,184,1, and 8,04,184,2
pertaining to the prohibition of the Hausing of any wild or undomesticated animal in an area
zoned residential, are adopted by reference and shall be in full force and effect within the
Town of Tiburon with the fallowing exception: all references in Marin County Code Section
8,04,179 to the Marin County Sheriffshall be deemed to refer to the Police Chief afthe Town
of Tiburon,
SECTION 2. SEVERABILITY
If any section, subsection, clause, sentence, or phrase af this Ordinance is far any
reasan held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decisian of a Court of competent
jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the
Ordinance, The Town Council afthe Town of Tiburan hereby declares that it would have
passed this Ordinance, any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective
of the fact that anyone or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, or phrases may be
declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 3, EFFECTIVE DATE,
This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty days after the date of passage,
and before the expiration af fifteen (15) days after passage by the Tawn Cauncil, a copy of
the ordinance shall be published with the names af the members voting for and against it at
Town Council Ordinance No.
NS, - Animal Control Amendment -Effective //98
1
least once in a newspaper of general circulation published in the Town of Tiburon,
This ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the Town Council afthe Tawn
of Tiburon on , and was adapted at a regular meeting of the Town
Council of the Town of Tiburon on , which was noticed pursuant to
Government Code Sectian 50022.3, by the follawing vate:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
HARRY S, MATTHEWS, MAYOR
Tawn of Tiburon
ATTEST:
DIANE L. CRANE, TOWN CLERK
drafted 12/5/96
2
~
II~
I
i
j
....~~:-::.-:---~
..' ".. "." .....,.......
,'---- "V
COUNTY OF MARIN
OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR
3501 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, SL'ITE 331, SAN RAFAEL, CA 94903
415/499-6358 - FAX 415/507 -4104
Martin J. Nichols
County Administrator
DATE:
December 16, 1997
TO:
Town/City /",\nagers
Suki Sen~Administrative Analyst
FROM:
Subj.:
Adoption of Additional Code Sections Pertaining to the Prohibition of
the Housing of Any Wild Or Undomesticated Animal in an Area Zoned
Residential
~ RECOMMENDED ACTION: It is recommended that your council adopt the attached additional
sections to your codes,
SUMMARY: On November 4, 1997 the Board of Supervisors adopted Ordinance No, 3264
adding code sections pertaining to the prohibnion of the housing of any wild or undomesticated
animal in an area zoned residential. These additional code sections were developed by staff of
the Marin Humane Society, County Counsel, Marin County Community Development Agency
and the County Administrator. The Marin County Animal Control Advisory Commission has
reviewed the language and strongly recommends adoption by the towns/cnies in the interest of
uniform enforcement. These amendments are in response to the increase in the importation of
non-domesticated animals into Marin's residential areas which constitute a poten1ial danger to
public health and safety and property damage, The most notable example occurred in March,
1997 when a Bengal Tiger was housed in Kent Woodlands, resulting in the Board of Supervisors'
adoption of an Urgency Ordinance prohibiting the keeping of "Big Cats" in residentially zoned
unincorporated areas of the County, The Board recommended that a broader scoped ordinance
be deveioped to address the keeping of wild or undomesticated animals in addition to "Big Cats"
and for subsequent adoption by the towns/cities for the purpose of uniform enforcement. While
the subject is regulated by the State in terms of permits etc" Section 2156 of the Fish and Game
Code allows regulation by local government so long as the regulation is more restrictive than the
State provides,
',~"'.t-
ORDINANCE NO. 3264
ORDINANCE OF THE MARIN COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE
COUNTY OF MARIN ADDING SECTIONS 8.04.182. 8.04.183.
8.04.184. 8.04.184.1 AND 8.04.184.2 OF THE MARIN
COUNTY CODE PERTAINING TO PROHIBITION OF THE
HOUSING OF ANY WILD OR UNDOMESTICATED ANIMAL IN
AN AREA ZONED RESIDENTIAL.
The Board of Supervisors of the County of Marin does hereby ordain as fallows:
Section I. Section 8.04.182 of the Marin County Code shall read as follows:
8.04.182
PROHIBITION
No person shall baard, have, keep, maintain, or have in his possession ar control, for
any length of time, in any area zoned residential, any wild and/or undomesticated animal, as
defined in Section 8.04.183.
Section II.
Section 8.04.183 of the Marin County Code shall read as follows:
8.04.183 DEFINITION OF WILD AND/OR UNDOMESTICATED ANIMAL
Far purpases of Sections 8.04.182 through 8.04.184.2, a wild and/or undomesticated
animal is defined as an animal which is wild by nature and not customarily domesticated in
Marin County and which, because of its size, disposition or other characteristics could
constitute a danger ta human life or property. Stich wild and/or undamesticated animals shall
be deemed ta include but are not exclusive of:
I. Class Mammalia
A. Order Carnivora
1, Family Felidae (cat) including but not limited ta such members as the tiger, the
jaguar, the leopard, the lion, the serval, the mountain lion, the babcat, the ocelot and the
cougar, excepting Felix Catus (domestic cat).
2. Family Hyenidae (Hyena).
3. Family Urisideae (bear).
4. Family Candidae (dog) excepting Canis Familiaris (domestic dog) and including but
nat limited to such members as the wolf, coyote and the jackal.
B. Order Probscidea (elephantl.
C. Order Primata (primates), including but not limited to the c.himpanzee, the baboon,
the orangutan, the gibbon, the macak and the gorilla, excepting the Family Hominidae (man).
."",,"
D. Order Artiodactyla, even-toed hoofed mammals such as water buffalo, camels, elk,
moase, deer and antelape, excluding the domesticated species of the Family Suidae
(domestic pig) and Family Bovidae (cattle, sheep, goats, llamas and alpacas).
E. Order Perissodactyla, odrl-toed hoofed mammals including the Ozebra and
rhinocerous, excluding the domesticated species of the Family Equidae (horses, dankeys,
etc.)
II. Class Reptilia
A. Order Squamata
1. Sub-Order Serpentes, all front and rear fanged venomous snakes.
2. Sub-Order Lacertilia, both venomous species of the Family Heloder Matidae (Gila
Monster and Mexican beaded lizardl.
B. Order Crocodilia (crocodile, alligator and cayman).
III. Class Aves
A. Sub-Order Ratitae, such as, but not limited to, ostriches,
rheas, cassowaries and emus, excluding small caged birds such as parakeets, canaries, love
birds and finches.
IV. Any other species of the animal kingdom (as oppased ta vegetable or mineral)
which is venomaus to human beings whether its venom is transmitted by bite, sting, touch or
other means, except the honey-producing bee.
Section III.
Section 8.04.184 of the Marin County Code shall read as follows:
8.04.184
IMPOUNDMENT
Any wild and/ar undomesticated animal as defined in Section 8.04.183 of this
Chapter determined to be in the Caunty of Marin in violation of Sectian 8.04,183 may be
impounded by Animal Control.
Section IV. Section 8.04.184.1 of the Marin County Code shall read as iollows:
8.04.184.1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL
Whenever Animal Control causes the impoundment of such wild and/or
undomesticated animal as herein authorized, such Animal Cantrol shall immediately give
notice of such impoundment, the grounds thereof and the place to which such animal has
been impounded.
2
Section V. Section 8.04.184.2 of the Marin County Code shall read as follows:
8.04.184.2 PENAL TV
Any person wha boards, has, keeps, maintains, or has in his passession ar cantral, far
any length of time, any wild and/or undamesticated animal in violation af any of the
provisions of Sectians 8.04.182 through 8.04.184,1 of this Chapter shall be guilty af a
misdemeanor and shall be subject to imprisonment in the County Jail for not more than six
(6) months or a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1000) or both.
Section VI. Publication.
This ordinance shaH be and is in full force and effect as of thirty (30) days from and
after the date of its passage and shall be published once before the expiration of fifteen (1 5)
days after its passage, with the names of the supervisors voting for and against the same in
the MARIN INDEPENDENT JOURNAL, a newspaper of general circulation published in Marin
County.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the
Caunty of Marin held on this 4th day of November, 1997 by the following vote:
AYES:
SUPERVISORS John B. Kress, Harold C. Brown, Jr., Steve Kinsey, Annette
Rose, Harry J. Maore. Chair
NONE
NONE
NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
o~
1
cP
DATE:
MAY 16,
1998
ITEM: 13
GOLDEN GATE BRIDGE, HIGHWAY AND mAN5PORTAT10N DISTRICT
CARNEY J. CAMPION
GENERAL MANAGER
April 17, 1998
RECEIVED
APR 2 1 1998
Mr. Robert L. Kleinert
Town Manager
Town of Tiburon
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 4920
TOWN MANAGERS OFFICE
TOWN OF TlBURON
Dear
Re: COnsolidation of Golden Gate ~ransit Ferry Feeder Bus Route 9 and
Route 11 into One Route
Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District has undertaken
significant efforts over the past year to economize and reduce costs wherever
reasonably possible as part of its efforts to meet the funding requirements of
its seismic retrofit program. As a result, the District's budget for next
year has been reduced by nearly $1 million, to date. However, the seismic
retrofit program requirements are so great (approximately $217 million) that
further efforts are necessary and therefore, as you are probably aware,
transit fare increases are being proposed effective July 1998. Further, the
District is continuing to challenge the need for, and examine the potential
for, cost savings adjustments to all of its services.
One service under present review is the ferry-feeder bus operation. The
Transportation Committee of the District Board of Directors has directed staff
to develop a proposal for consolidation of Golden Gate Transit ferry-feeder
bus Route 9 and Route 11 to reduce operating costs while continuing to provide
a level of service commensurate with that generally provided ferry commuters
of central and southern Marin.
Currently, feeder bus service is provided to four morning ferry departures and
four evening ferry arrivals each weekday. Route 9 provides four morning and
three evening trips, and Route 11 provides three morning and three evening
trips for a daily total of thirteen feeder bus trips. While both routes serve
stops along Tiburon Boulevard, Route 9 also serves the Reed Ranch/Blackfield
hillside area and the residential area around Belvedere Lagoon. Route 11
serves the Stewart/Hillary hillside area. The District is considering two
proposals. Both would consolidate the two routes into one route making four
morning and four evening trips. One alternative would serve both hillside
areas but would omit the loop around Belvedere Lagoon. The second alternative
would include the Belvedere Lagoon loop on the seven daily trips which now
serve the lagoon loop.
The following impacts on passengers are anticipated if the first alternative
is implemented:
Route 11 passengers would not be affected by the change as their travel
times to and from the ferry terminal would be unchanged. They would
benefit from bus service to two additional ferry trips now served only
by Route 9.
Bus travel time for Route 9 passengers who live in or west of the Reed
Ranch/Blackfield area might increase by one or two minutes. Route 9
passengers would benefit from bus service to one additional evening
ferry trip now served only by Route 11.
sex 1000 JQ(::;!C:C '37"':'-:C:i' :j;.,\j ;=<':'NCSCJ:':'l.F'JRr\lIA }41::H60l. -ElE?f1G,"iE ~~~. n~ ':a"'-a
FA-(
'1t3 z,.j~ 1-
Mr. Robert L. Kleinert
April 17, 1998
Page 2
All ferry-feeder service would be
live around Belvedere Lagoon. It
residents use the service daily.
eliminated for Route 9 passengers who
is estimated that 15 to 20 Belvedere
The following impacts on passengers are anticipated if the second alternative
is implemented:
Bus travel time for Route 11 passengers would increase by about four
minutes each way, the additional time it takes to travel the Belvedere
Lagoon loop. They would benefit from bus service to two additional
ferry trips now served only by Route 9.
Bus travel tLme for Route 9 passengers who live in or west of the Reed
Ranch/Blackfield area will increase by about five minutes. Route 9
passengers would benefit from bus service to one additional evening
ferry trip now served only by Route 11.
Bus service for Belvedere loop passengers would remain unchanged.
This action will be considered by the Transportation Committee of the District
Board of Directors on Thursday, April 30, 1998. The Committee instructed
staff to advise you of this proposal and of the opportunity to comment. Thank
you for your attention and if there are any questions, please call Jerome M.
Kuykendall, Director of Planning and Policy Analysis at (415) 257-4465.
Very truly YOf11' ,
a ~~
carn~ pion
General Ma agar
CJC: snm
c: Gene P. Rexrode
Wayne T. Diggs
Jerome M. Kuykendall
,.,,,:\woniS\bwVTocoir12.048
TOWN OF TIBURON
,
~~~{)... r/~G""Qz
n! _:;
7 "
" .
~'''''''''''' ,,".....
:
1505 TIBURON BOULEVARD. TIBURON . CALIFORNIA 94920. (415) 435-7383
FAX (415) 435-2438
April 29, 1998
OFFICE OF THE TOWN MANAGER
Robert L. Kleinert
VIAFACSIMll..E (415) 923-2367
Carney 1. Campion, General Manager
Galden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District
Box 9000, Presidio Station
San Francisco, CA 94129-0601
SUBJECT:
CONSOLIDATION OF GOLDEN GATE TRANSIT FERRY FEEDER
BUS ROUTE 9 AND ROUTE 11 IN TIBURON
Dear Mr, Campion:
The follawing comments have been received by the Town of Tiburon with regard to the
consolidation of Feny Feeder Bus Routes 9 & II to the Tiburon Feny:
. Tiburon residents living on the west end of Town may be inconvenienced by the
added time of a consolidated route and would consider driving to the City versus
using the Feny;
. Although not clearly stated in your letter, it appears that Tiburon residents who
take the Na, 11 from Lyford Drive would be excluded from Alternate 2 of the
consolidated plan, Since this represents a sizeable graup of riders, the Town of
Tiburan would strangly object ta this propasal. One solution might be to have
Bus Route NO.8 pick up those residents on its way into Town, and/or coordinate
Route lO's times to coincide with the feny schedule, thereby eliminating one feeder
bus,
. Belvedere Lagoon residents would like the service cantinued and (at least one)
would be willing to pay extra for the service; some people think: the District has
underestimated the number of riders actually using this service.
. Tiburon residents appreciate the feeder service and want it continued, Same
people have wondered haw the Bridge District is able to subsidize the service of
Larkspur feny passengers, with feeder buses from Ross, San Anselmo, and
Greenbrae, while it is unclear whether the Tiburon/Belvedere service is subsidized
by the Golden Gate Bride District or whether it is subsidized by the local (Blue &
Gold) ferry service and included in the fares, Clarification of this question might
prave useful in determining solutions to the problem,
Letter to Carney J, Campion
April 29, 1998
Page Two
Thank you far your consideration of these comments at your Board of Directors meeting
on Thursday, Apri130, 1998,
Robert L. Kleinert
Town Manager
cc: Alan Zahradnik
(Via Facsimile - 257-4516)
Tiburon Town Council