San Rafael City Council
April 21, 2025

AGENDA
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL - MONDAY, APRIL 21, 2025
SPECIAL MEETING AT 4:00 P.M.

REGULAR MEETING AT 6:00 P.M.

This meeting will be held in-person. This meeting is being streamed to YouTube at www.youtube.com/cityofsanrafael.

How to participate in the meeting:
• You are welcome to come to the meeting and provide public comment in person. Each speaker will have 2-minutes to provide public comment per agenda item. • Submit your comments by email to [email protected] by 4:00 p.m. the day of the meeting.

If you experience technical difficulties during the meeting, please contact [email protected].

SPECIAL MEETING AT 4:00 P.M.

San Rafael Third Floor Conference Room
1400 Fifth Avenue, San Rafael, CA 94901
Watch Online:

Watch on Zoom Webinar: https://tinyurl.com/SPCC-04-21-2025 Listen by phone: (669) 900-9128
ID: 815-9664-1794#
One Tap Mobile: +16699009128,,81596641794# US

1. Pickleweed Advisory Committee Interviews
Interview Applicants and Make Appointments to Fill Three Four-Year Terms Through the End of April 2029 on the Pickleweed Advisory Committee, Due to the Expiration of Terms of Louise Yost, Kate Sprague, and Rosa Vasquez (CC)
Recommended Action – Interview applicants and make appointments Adjourn to Closed Session.

REGULAR MEETING AT 6:00 P.M.

San Rafael City Hall, Council Chambers
1400 Fifth Avenue, San Rafael, CA 94901
Watch Online:

Watch on Zoom Webinar: https://tinyurl.com/CC-2025-04-21 Watch on YouTube: www.youtube.com/cityofsanrafael
Listen by phone: (669) 444-9171
ID: 860-6190-5675#
One Tap Mobile: +16694449171,,86061905675# US
OPEN SESSION – THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM – FOLLOWING SPECIAL MEETING

1. Mayor Kate to announce Closed Session items.

CLOSED SESSION – THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM – FOLLOWING SPECIAL MEETING 2 2. Closed Session:
a. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)
Matthew Boussina v. City of San Rafael, et al, Marin County Superior Court Case No.

CV0005160
b. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8
Property: 200 Yacht Club Drive, San Rafael CA 94901; APN.: 014-152-27 Agency negotiator: Cristine Alilovich, City Manager; Micah Hinkle, Community & Economic Development Director
Negotiating parties: Scott Murphy & Nate Valentine
Under negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment
c. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8
Property: 350 Merrydale Road / 3833 Redwood Highway, San Rafael APNs 179-041-27 & 179-041-28
Agency negotiator: Cristine Alilovich, City Manager; John Stefanski, Assistant City Manager; Daniel Cooperman, Community Services Division Director
Negotiating parties: Ridgewood Properties, a California General Partnership, as to an undivided ½ interest; and Francine M. Clayton, Trustee of The Francine M. Clayton 1996 Trust, as to an undivided ½ interest
Under negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment
CITY MANAGER AND COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS:
(including AB 1234 Reports on Meetings and Conferences Attended at City Expense)

3. City Manager and Councilmember Reports:

CONSENT CALENDAR:

The opportunity for public comment on consent calendar items will occur prior to the City Council’s vote on the Consent Calendar. The City Council may approve the entire consent calendar with one action. In the alternative, items on the Consent Calendar may be removed by any City Council or staff member, for separate discussion and vote.

4. Consent Calendar Items:
a. Approval of Minutes
Approve Minutes of the Regular and Special City Council Meetings of April 7, 2025 (CC) Recommended Action - Approve minutes as submitted
b. Statement of Economic Interests Annual Filings
Accept Report on Fair Political Practices Commission Form 700, Statement of Economic Interests, 2024 Annual Filings for Designated Employees and Consultants (CC) Recommended Action – Accept report
c. Camping Ordinance Final Adoption
Final Adoption of Ordinance 2046: An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Rafael Amending Chapter 19.50 to the San Rafael Municipal Code, Entitled “Camping On Public Property” to Prohibit Camping in Parks (CC)
3 Recommended Action – Final Adoption of Ordinance 2046 d. Canal Alliance and The Multicultural Center of Marin Agreement Amendments Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Amend the Contracts for the Canal Community Resilience Planning Project with Canal Alliance to Amend the Scope of Work, Extend the Term and Increase the Not to Exceed Amount by $13,750 for a Total Amount Not to Exceed $231,400 and with The Multicultural Center of Marin to Amend the Scope of Work, Extend the Term and Increase the Not to Exceed Amount by $74,797 for a Total Amount Not to Exceed $236,797 (CM)
Recommended Action – Adopt Resolution
e. Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) Regional Measure 3: Safe Routes to Transit and Bay Trail Program Resolution of Local Support Resolution of Local Support Authorizing the Filing of an Application for Funding Assigned to MTC and Committing Any Necessary Matching Funds and Stating the Assurance to Complete the Canal Neighborhood Bellam Gateway Local Access Improvement Project (PW)
Recommended Action – Adopt Resolution
f. B Street Culvert Replacement Project
Accept Completion of the B Street Culvert Replacement Project, City Project No. 11380, and Authorize the City Clerk to File the Notice of Completion (PW) Recommended Action – Accept completion of the B Street Culvert Replacement Project and authorize the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion

PUBLIC HEARINGS

5. Public Hearings
a. Appeal to the City Council of the Planning Commission’s Approval of a Reasonable Accommodation Request
Resolution Denying the Appeal of and Upholding the Planning Commission Approval of a Reasonable Accommodation Request at 131 Valley View Avenue; APN 015-073-10 (CED) Recommended Action – Adopt Resolution

OTHER AGENDA ITEMS

6. Other Agenda Items
a. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
Resolution Recommending Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Project Funding for the Fiscal Year 2025-2026 to the Marin County Board of Supervisors (CED) Recommended Action – Adopt Resolution
b. Second Street and Fourth Street Intersection Improvements Project Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Second Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with CSW/Stuber-Stroeh Engineering Group, Inc. for Additional Design Services Associated with the Second Street and Fourth Street Intersection Improvements Project, in the Amount Not to Exceed $66,000, Increasing the Total Not-to-Exceed Amount Under the Agreement of $294,482 (PW) Recommended Action – Adopt Resolution

OPEN TIME FOR PUBLIC EXPRESSION
4 The public is welcome to address the City Council at this time on matters not on the agenda that are within its jurisdiction. Please be advised that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the City Council is not permitted to discuss or take action on any matter not on the agenda unless it determines that an emergency exists, or that there is a need to take immediate action which arose following posting of the agenda. Comments may be no longer than two minutes and should be respectful to the community.

ADJOURNMENT:

Any records relating to an agenda item, received by a majority or more of the Council less than 72 hours before the meeting, shall be available for inspection online and at City Hall, 1400 Fifth Avenue, and placed with other agendarelated materials on the table in front of the Council Chamber prior to the meeting. Sign Language interpreters may be requested by calling (415) 485-3066 (voice), emailing [email protected] or using the California Telecommunications Relay Service by dialing “711”, at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting. Copies of documents are available in accessible formats upon request. To request Spanish language interpretation, please submit an online form at https://www.cityofsanrafael.org/request-for-interpretation/. ____________________________________________________________________________________

FOR CITY CLERK ONLY
Council Meeting:

Disposition:

Special Meeting
Agenda Item No: 1
Meeting Date: April 21, 2025

SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Department: City Clerk
Prepared by: Lindsay Lara, City Clerk City Manager Approval: ___________ TOPIC: PICKLEWEED ADVISORY COMMITTEE INTERVIEWS
SUBJECT: INTERVIEW APPLICANTS AND MAKE APPOINTMENTS TO FILL THREE FOUR-YEAR TERMS THROUGH THE END OF APRIL 2029 ON

THE PICKLEWEED ADVISORY COMMITTEE, DUE TO THE

EXPIRATION OF TERMS OF LOUISE YOST, KATE SPRAGUE, AND

ROSA VASQUEZ
RECOMMENDATION:

Interview the following applicants and make appointments to fill four four-year terms through the end of April 2029 on the Pickleweed Advisory Committee due to the expiration of terms of Louise Yost, Kate Sprague, and Rosa Vasquez, and a vacant Youth Member position.

Name
Ellen Arbit
Kate Sprague
Laura Miller
Narciso De Leon
Rosa Vasquez
BACKGROUND:

The terms of Louise Yost, Kate Sprague, and Rosa Vasquez are set to expire at the end of April 2025. The three vacant positions must be Canal neighborhood residents, and the applications received are all Canal neighborhood residents. Louise Yost is not eligible to reapply because she has served two full terms on the Committee and is rotating off, and both Kate and Rosa have reapplied.

The City Clerk’s office received seven applications; but two withdrew from the application process.

SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 2
The Pickleweed Advisory Committee provides valuable input in representing and advocating for the Canal area resident’s needs and wishes for programs and services; and is a primary public networking resource between the Canal residents, representatives from governmental and non-profit agencies, and others. The Pickleweed Advisory Committee works in conjunction with the City of San Rafael. Meetings are held on the first Wednesday of every other month at 6:00 p.m. at the Al Boro Community Center.

ANALYSIS:

The City Clerk’s office recruited for the Pickleweed Advisory Committee vacancies and received seven (7) applications; however, two applicants withdrew. Staff recommends the City Council interview the five (5) eligible applicants and make appointments to fill the three/four terms.

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this item.

COMMUNITY OUTREACH:

The call for applications for the Pickleweed Advisory Committee was advertised through mass email notification, the City website, social media platforms, Marin IJ, and physically posted at City facilities.

ATTACHMENT:

1. Five (5) Applications
Boards, Commissions & Committees Application
1 / 3
Q1
Contact Information / Información del contacto
First and Last Name / Nombre y Apellido Ellen Arbit
Address / Dirección
City / Ciudad San Rafael
State / estado CA
ZIP/Postal Code / Código postal 94901
Email Address / Dirección de correo electrónico
Phone Number / Número de teléfono
Q2
What district do you currently live in?¿En qué distrito vive actualmente?
District 3/Eastern / Distrito 3/Este
Q3
How long have you lived in San Rafael?
10 years
Q4
Business Information
Company Retired
Q5
How did you hear about this vacant position?
City Council Agenda
#106

COMPLETE
Collector: Web Link 1 (Web Link)
Started: Thursday, February 20, 2025 10:55:12 PM
Last Modified: Thursday, February 20, 2025 11:04:43 PM
Time Spent: 00:09:30
IP Address: 172.59.160.156

Boards, Commissions & Committees Application
2 / 3
Q6
What Board would you like to apply to?¿A cuál te gustaría aplicar?
Pickleweed Advisory Committee
Q18
Do you participate in any civic activities? If so, what are they? Volunteer with Extrafood.org
Volunteer with Marin Villages
Q19
List any civic organizations of which you are a member:

None
Q20
Education:

BA
Q21
Why are you interested in serving on a board or commission? Resident of local area and aware of needs
I am a senior and aware of needs
I want to serve
Q22
Describe possible areas in which you may have a conflict of interest with the City:

None
Q23
Upload your resume.

Q24
Ethnicity / Raza/etnia:

Boards, Commissions & Committees Application
3 / 3
Q25
To which gender do you most identify?¿Con qué género se identifica más?
Q26
How old are you?¿Cuántos años tienes?
Boards, Commissions & Committees Application
1 / 3
Q1
Contact Information / Información del contacto
First and Last Name / Nombre y Apellido Kate Sprague
Address / Dirección
City / Ciudad San Rafael
State / estado CA
ZIP/Postal Code / Código postal 94901
Email Address / Dirección de correo electrónico
Phone Number / Número de teléfono
Q2
What district do you currently live in?¿En qué distrito vive actualmente?
District 1/Southern / Distrito 1/Sur
Q3
How long have you lived in San Rafael?
14 years
Q4
Business Information
Respondent skipped this question
Q5
How did you hear about this vacant position?
Other (please specify):

I am currently on the committee.

Q6
What Board would you like to apply to?¿A cuál te gustaría aplicar?
Pickleweed Advisory Committee
#115

COMPLETE
Collector: Web Link 1 (Web Link)
Started: Wednesday, April 09, 2025 2:09:12 PM
Last Modified: Wednesday, April 09, 2025 2:17:29 PM
Time Spent: 00:08:17
IP Address: 64.38.187.133

Boards, Commissions & Committees Application
2 / 3
Q18
Do you participate in any civic activities? If so, what are they? I have served on the Pickleweed Advisory Committee. I am on the board of our children’s non-profit swim team. I am on the board of the PTA/Foundation at our children’s public school. I work in public education. We are active in our church in San Rafael. I try to attend city meetings related to our neighborhood and city council meetings when possible. I am on the board of our HOA.

Q19
List any civic organizations of which you are a member:

Pickleweed Advisory Committee
Glenwood School Foundation
Swimarin Board
Q20
Education:

Bachelor’s degree in Mathematics/University of Puget Sound Master’s degree in Education/Northwestern University
Master’s degree in Education Administration/San Francisco State University Q21
Why are you interested in serving on a board or commission? I enjoy learning about things going on to serve the hyper-local community in our neighborhood, and I appreciate the opportunity to be involved in the city’s support of our neighborhood.

Q22
Describe possible areas in which you may have a conflict of interest with the City:

NA
Q23
Upload your resume.

Respondent skipped this question

Boards, Commissions & Committees Application
3 / 3
Q24
Ethnicity / Raza/etnia:

Q25
To which gender do you most identify?¿Con qué género se identifica más?
Q26
How old are you?¿Cuántos años tienes?
Boards, Commissions & Committees Application
1 / 3
Q1
Contact Information / Información del contacto
First and Last Name / Nombre y Apellido Laura Miller
Address / Dirección
City / Ciudad San Rafael
State / estado CA
ZIP/Postal Code / Código postal 94901
Email Address / Dirección de correo electrónico
Phone Number / Número de teléfono
Q2
What district do you currently live in?¿En qué distrito vive actualmente?
District 3/Eastern / Distrito 3/Este,
Francisco Blvd. E.

Other (please specify)Otros (especifique):

Q3
How long have you lived in San Rafael?
15 years
Q4
Business Information
Company Independent Contact
Address
City/Town San Rafael
ZIP/Postal Code 94901
#107

COMPLETE
Collector: Web Link 1 (Web Link)
Started: Monday, March 03, 2025 11:14:08 PM
Last Modified: Monday, March 03, 2025 11:26:51 PM
Time Spent: 00:12:42
IP Address: 172.56.46.187

Boards, Commissions & Committees Application
2 / 3
Q5
How did you hear about this vacant position?
Other (please specify):

Community garden
Q6
What Board would you like to apply to?¿A cuál te gustaría aplicar?
Park and Recreation Commission,
Pickleweed Advisory Committee,
Planning Commission,
Public Art Review Board,
Police Advisory & Accountability Committee
Q18
Do you participate in any civic activities? If so, what are they? No
Q19
List any civic organizations of which you are a member:

COMMUNITY GARDEN REPRESENTATIVE
Q20
Education:

Agricultural studies
Q21
Why are you interested in serving on a board or commission? I personally only want to rule the community garden and make it larger with community service workers effort.

Q22
Describe possible areas in which you may have a conflict of interest with the City:

I would suggest a bathroom facility in the garden for the residents who pay for the community garden.

Q23
Upload your resume.

Respondent skipped this question

Boards, Commissions & Committees Application
3 / 3
Q24
Ethnicity / Raza/etnia:

Q25
To which gender do you most identify?¿Con qué género se identifica más?
Q26
How old are you?¿Cuántos años tienes?

Boards, Commissions & Committees Application
1 / 3
Q1
Contact Information / Información del contacto
First and Last Name / Nombre y Apellido Narciso De Leon Address / Dirección
City / Ciudad San Rafael
State / estado Ca
ZIP/Postal Code / Código postal 94901
Email Address / Dirección de correo electrónico
Phone Number / Número de teléfono
Q2
What district do you currently live in?¿En qué distrito vive actualmente?
District 3/Eastern / Distrito 3/Este,
Canal neighborhood
Other (please specify)Otros (especifique):

Q3
How long have you lived in San Rafael?
30 yrs
Q4
Business Information
Company N/A
Q5
How did you hear about this vacant position?
City Council Agenda
#105

COMPLETE
Collector: Web Link 1 (Web Link)
Started: Thursday, January 30, 2025 7:31:17 PM
Last Modified: Thursday, January 30, 2025 7:43:58 PM
Time Spent: 00:12:40
IP Address: 172.56.46.40

Boards, Commissions & Committees Application
2 / 3
Q6
What Board would you like to apply to?¿A cuál te gustaría aplicar?
Pickleweed Advisory Committee
Q18
Do you participate in any civic activities? If so, what are they? Helping to donate food at marin residents with a nonprofit organization Q19
List any civic organizations of which you are a member:

Extrafood.org
Q20
Education:

High school
Q21
Why are you interested in serving on a board or commission? Is my responsibility to help community be better and secure.

Q22
Describe possible areas in which you may have a conflict of interest with the City:

City approval of selling to much alcohol in our area of living.

Police and city dept abuse of their responsibilities against hispanics Q23
Upload your resume.

Respondent skipped this question

Boards, Commissions & Committees Application
3 / 3
Q24
Ethnicity / Raza/etnia:
.

Q25
To which gender do you most identify?¿Con qué género se identifica más?
Q26
How old are you?¿Cuántos años tienes?
Boards, Commissions & Committees Application
1 / 3
Q1
Contact Information / Información del contacto
First and Last Name / Nombre y Apellido Rosa Vasquez
Address / Dirección
City / Ciudad San Rafael
State / estado CA
ZIP/Postal Code / Código postal 94901
Email Address / Dirección de correo electrónico
Phone Number / Número de teléfono
Q2
What district do you currently live in?¿En qué distrito vive actualmente?
District 1/Southern / Distrito 1/Sur
Q3
How long have you lived in San Rafael?
21 Q4
Business Information
Respondent skipped this question
Q5
How did you hear about this vacant position?
City Council Agenda
Q6
What Board would you like to apply to?¿A cuál te gustaría aplicar?
Pickleweed Advisory Committee
#110

COMPLETE
Collector: Web Link 1 (Web Link)
Started: Thursday, March 13, 2025 6:29:32 PM
Last Modified: Sunday, March 16, 2025 4:24:03 PM
Time Spent: Over a day
IP Address: 72.159.81.44

Boards, Commissions & Committees Application
2 / 3
Q18
Do you participate in any civic activities? If so, what are they? Picklewees Advisory Committee
Q19
List any civic organizations of which you are a member:

Pickleweed Advisory Committee and as a volunteer “Voces del Canal” Q20
Education:

One year Associated Degree didn’t finish
Q21
Why are you interested in serving on a board or commission? I’m interested cause I want to make a difference for my community.

Q22
Describe possible areas in which you may have a conflict of interest with the City:

An area that I have a conflict with the city are the women who come to the area of Canal to sell themselves, which we call “Las cariñosas.

Q23
Upload your resume.

Respondent skipped this question
Q24
Ethnicity / Raza/etnia:

Boards, Commissions & Committees Application
3 / 3
Q25
To which gender do you most identify?¿Con qué género se identifica más?
Q26
How old are you?¿Cuántos años tienes?
Minutes Subject to Approval at the April 21, 2025 Meeting

MINUTES
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL - MONDAY, APRIL 7, 2025
SPECIAL MEETING AT 4:30 P.M.

REGULAR MEETING AT 6:00 P.M.

This meeting will be held in-person. This meeting is being streamed to YouTube at www.youtube.com/cityofsanrafael.

How to participate in the meeting:
• You are welcome to come to the meeting and provide public comment in person. Each speaker will have 2-minutes to provide public comment per agenda item. • Submit your comments by email to [email protected] by 4:00 p.m. the day of the meeting.

If you experience technical difficulties during the meeting, please contact [email protected].

SPECIAL MEETING AT 4:30 P.M.

San Rafael Third Floor Conference Room
1400 Fifth Avenue, San Rafael, CA 94901
Watch Online:

Watch on Zoom Webinar: https://tinyurl.com/SPCC-04-07-2025 Listen by phone: (669) 444-9171
ID: 851-7304-1226#
One Tap Mobile: +16694449171,,85173041226# US

Present: Councilmember Hill
Councilmember Kertz
Councilmember Llorens Gulati
Mayor Kate

Absent: Vice Mayor Bushey
Also Present: City Manager Cristine Alilovich
City Clerk Lindsay Lara
Mayor Kate called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m. All members of the City Council were present, except for Vice Mayor Bushey.

Mayor Kate invited public comment; however, there was none.

1. Voter Approved Tax Oversight Committee Interviews
Interview Applicants and Make Appointments to Fill Two Four-Year Terms to the End of April 2029 on the Voter Approved Tax Oversight Committee Due to Expiration of Terms of Caleb McWaters and Carsten Anderson (CC)
The City Council interviewed the following applicants: Jon Haveman, Ben Fowler, Caleb McWaters and Masoud Nilforoush.
2 After discussion, Councilmember Kertz moved and Councilmember Llorens Gulati seconded to reappoint Caleb McWaters and to appoint Jon Haveman to the Voter Approved Tax Oversight Committee to the end of April 2029.

AYES: Councilmembers: Hill, Kertz, Llorens Gulati & Mayor Kate NOES: Councilmembers: None
ABSENT: Councilmembers: Bushey
Mayor Kate adjourned to Closed Session at 5:06 p.m.

REGULAR MEETING AT 6:00 P.M.

San Rafael City Hall, Council Chambers
1400 Fifth Avenue, San Rafael, CA 94901
Watch Online:

Watch on Zoom Webinar: https://tinyurl.com/CC-2025-04-07 Watch on YouTube: www.youtube.com/cityofsanrafael
Listen by phone: (669)444-9171
ID: 863 4489 1398
One Tap Mobile: +16694449171,,86344891398# US
OPEN SESSION – THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM – FOLLOWING SPECIAL MEETING

1. Mayor Kate announced Closed Session items.

CLOSED SESSION – THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM – FOLLOWING SPECIAL MEETING

2. Closed Session:
a. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—EXISTING LITIGATION pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)
Parks and Public Trust, et al. v. City of San Rafael, Marin County Superior Court Case No.

CV0005542
Mark Allen v. City of San Rafael, Marin County Superior Court Case No. CV0005691 b. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8
Property: 350 Merrydale Road / 3833 Redwood Highway, San Rafael APNs 179-041-27 & 179-041-28
Agency negotiator: Cristine Alilovich, City Manager; John Stefanski, Assistant City Manager; Daniel Cooperman, Community Services Division Director
Negotiating parties: Ridgewood Properties, a California General Partnership, as to an undivided ½ interest; and Francine M. Clayton, Trustee of The Francine M. Clayton 1996 Trust, as to an undivided ½ interest
Under negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment

Present: Councilmember Hill
Councilmember Kertz
Councilmember Llorens Gulati
Mayor Kate

Absent: Vice Mayor Bushey
Also Present: City Manager Cristine Alilovich
3 City Attorney Robert Epstein
City Clerk Lindsay Lara
Mayor Kate called the meeting to order at 6:06 p.m. and invited City Clerk Lindsay Lara to call the roll. All members of the City Council were present, except for Vice Mayor Bushey.

City Attorney Robert Epstein announced that no reportable action was taken in Closed Session.

Mayor Kate provided opening remarks which included gratitude to City Staff, Federal Administration implications, and a land acknowledgment.

City Clerk Lindsay Lara informed the community that the in-person meeting would also be recorded and streamed live to YouTube and through Zoom. She noted the two-minute timer for public comment and closed captioning on Zoom.

CITY MANAGER AND COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS:
(including AB 1234 Reports on Meetings and Conferences Attended at City Expense)

3. City Manager and Councilmember Reports:

City Manager Cristine Alilovich reported on:
• Police Department’s assistance at a peaceful protest at the Civic Center • San Rafael letters opposing AB306 and SB79
• Immigration Know Your Rights red cards, which would be available in Spanish & English at San Rafael Community Centers
• Behavioral Health and Recovery Systems Survey, would be open through June 1 • Earth Month events:
o Neighborhood Cleanup on April 19th at Pickleweed Park at 9 a.m. o Clean and Green Day on April 22nd in Downtown from 10-12 p.m. • 2nd Friday Art Walk at 5 p.m.
• Sea Level Rise and Climate Action Forum on April 24th from 5:30-7:30 p.m. at BioMarin • Canal Alliance Community Fair on May 3rd from 12-4 p.m. at 711 Grand Avenue • May Madness events: Cruise on May 9th at 6 p.m. and Car Show and Parade on May 10th from 12-6 p.m.

City Councilmember Reports:
• Councilmember Kertz reported on the San Rafael Chamber of Commerce’s new group for businesses in North San Rafael, Homeless Policy Steering Committee, reading to students at San Pedro Elementary School, Priority Setting Meetings, Marin Wildfire Prevention Authority Board Meeting, Marin County Council of Mayors and Councilmembers Legislative Committee, subcommittee for a weather shelter, California Wildfire and Forest Resiliency Task Force, City/Schools County meeting, and Cal Cities Policy Committee.
• Councilmember Hill reported on reading to students at Laurel Dell and Coleman Elementary schools, West End Neighborhood Association meeting, and Marin County Council of Mayors and Councilmembers meeting.
• Councilmember Llorens Gulati reported on Marin Clean Energy, Marin Promise’s Canal Promise Neighborhood Steering Committee, Marin County Sea Level Rise Steering Committee, Marin County Council of Mayors and Councilmembers, Cal Cities Policy Committee, parking permit program, and Marin Transit.
• Mayor Kate reported on San Rafael Sanitation District, Marin Transit, Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit, Transportation Authority of Marin, Pet Emergency Center ribbon 4 cutting, and Villa Marin’s 40th Anniversary.

Mayor Kate invited public comment.

Speaker: Name withheld
CONSENT CALENDAR:

Mayor Kate invited public comment.

Speaker: John Reynolds
Councilmember Llorens Gulati moved and Councilmember Kertz seconded to approve the Consent Calendar.

4. Consent Calendar Items:
a. Approval of Minutes
Approve Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting of March 3, 2025 and Regular City Council Meeting of March 17, 2025 (CC)
Approved minutes as submitted
b. Downtown San Rafael Business Improvement District Advisory Board Appointments Resolution Appointing Downtown Business Improvement District Advisory Board Members (CED)
Resolution 15386 - Resolution Appointing Downtown Business Improvement District Advisory Board Members
c. Public Service Award 2025
Resolution of Appreciation to Recipient of the Richard P. O’Brien and Mary Ferrario O’Brien Public Service Award for 2025 (CM)
Resolution 15387 - Resolution of Appreciation to Recipient of the Richard P. O’Brien and Mary Ferrario O’Brien Public Service Award for 2025
d. Public Service Award Selection Committee Criteria
Report on the Public Service Award Selection Committee and Update on Changes to the Selection Guidelines & Criteria (CM)
Received and filed
e. Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, Belonging and Housing Consulting Services Agreement Amendment
Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Amend the Professional Services Agreement with Liz Darby for Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, Belonging, and Housing Consulting Services, to Increase the Contract Amount by $50,000, for a Total Not to Exceed $125,000 (CM) Resolution 15388 - Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Amend the Professional Services Agreement with Liz Darby for Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, Belonging, and Housing Consulting Services, to Increase the Contract Amount by $50,000, for a Total Not to Exceed $125,000 f. Proclamations
Proclamations Supporting Celebrate Diversity Month, National Arab American Heritage Month, National Library Week and Week of the Young Child Received and filed
5 g. Second Amendment to the Workers’ Compensation Claims Administration Professional Services Agreement
Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Second Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with LWP Claims Solutions, Inc, for Workers’ Compensation Claims Administration Services Increasing the Total Not to Exceed Amount Under the Agreement to $1,745,311, Subject to Appropriation, and Extending the Term Date June 30, 2026 (HR)
Resolution 15389 - Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Second Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with LWP Claims Solutions, Inc, for Workers’ Compensation Claims Administration Services Increasing the Total Not to Exceed Amount Under the Agreement to $1,745,311, Subject to Appropriation, and Extending the Term Date June 30, 2026
h. San Rafael Public Library Book Purchase
Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a First Amendment to the Purchase Order with Baker & Taylor (Exempt from Bidding) to Increase the Purchase Amount of $123,000 (LR)
Resolution 15390 - Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a First Amendment to the Purchase Order with Baker & Taylor (Exempt from Bidding) to Increase the Purchase Amount of $123,000
i. Special Event Street Closures in San Rafael
Resolution Authorizing the Temporary Closure of Streets in San Rafael for Special Events (PD)
Resolution 15391 - Resolution Authorizing the Temporary Closure of Streets in San Rafael for Special Events
j. Downtown Library Renovation Project
Resolutions (PW/LR)
i. Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Second Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with Noll & Tam Architects for Additional Construction Administration Services Associated with the Downtown Library Modernization Project, in the Additional Amount Not to Exceed $47,640, Increasing the Total Not to Exceed Amount Under the Agreement to $439,371, and Extend the Contract by Three Months
Resolution 15392 - Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Second Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with Noll & Tam Architects for Additional Construction Administration Services Associated with the Downtown Library Modernization Project, in the Additional Amount Not to Exceed $47,640, Increasing the Total Not to Exceed Amount Under the Agreement to $439,371, and Extend the Contract by Three Months ii. Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Second Amendment to the Construction Contract with Unger Construction, Co. in an Additional Amount of $100,000, for a Total of $2,200,000 for the Project, Appropriating $100,000 from Available Library Special Assessment Fund Balance (Fund 215) and Authorizing the Public Works Director to Take Related Action
Resolution 15393 - Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Second Amendment to the Construction Contract with Unger Construction, Co. in an Additional Amount of $100,000, for a Total of $2,200,000 for the Project, Appropriating $100,000 from Available Library Special Assessment Fund Balance (Fund 215) and Authorizing the Public Works Director to Take Related Action
6 k. San Rafael Canal Crossing Project Funding Agreement Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Program Supplement Agreement with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) for $1,575,000 in Active Transportation Program (ATP) Funds for a Feasibility Study of the San Rafael Canal Crossing Project. CEQA Determination: Exempt Pursuant to Guideline Section 15378(b)(5) (PW)
Resolution 15394 - Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Program Supplement Agreement with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) for $1,575,000 in Active Transportation Program (ATP) Funds for a Feasibility Study of the San Rafael Canal Crossing Project. CEQA Determination: Exempt Pursuant to Guideline Section 15378(b)(5) l. Pickleweed Childcare Replacement Portables Project
Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a First Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with Loving Campos Associates, Architects, Inc. for Additional Architectural and Structural Engineering Design Services Associated with the Pickleweed Childcare Replacement Portables Project, in the Amount Not to Exceed $33,700, for a Revised Total Agreement Amount of $100,200 (PW) Resolution 15395 - Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a First Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with Loving Campos Associates, Architects, Inc. for Additional Architectural and Structural Engineering Design Services Associated with the Pickleweed Childcare Replacement Portables Project, in the Amount Not to Exceed $33,700, for a Revised Total Agreement Amount of $100,200
m. South Merrydale Road – Civic Center Connector (Rafael Meadows) Project Grant Funding Agreements
Resolutions (PW):
i. Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Funding Agreement with the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) for the South Merrydale Road – Civic Center Connector (Rafael Meadows) Project, in an Amount Not to Exceed $1,940,000 Resolution 15396 - Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Funding Agreement with the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) for the South Merrydale Road – Civic Center Connector (Rafael Meadows) Project, in an Amount Not to Exceed $1,940,000 ii. Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Funding Agreement with the California Department of Transportation (CalTrans) for the South Merrydale Road – Civic Center Connector (Rafael Meadows) Project, in an Amount Not to Exceed $1,940,000
Resolution 15397 - Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Funding Agreement with the California Department of Transportation (CalTrans) for the South Merrydale Road – Civic Center Connector (Rafael Meadows) Project, in an Amount Not to Exceed $1,940,000
AYES: Councilmembers: Hill, Kertz, Llorens Gulati & Mayor Kate NOES: Councilmembers: None
ABSENT: Councilmembers: Bushey
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS:

5. Special Presentations:

Mayor Kate invited public comment; however, there was none. 7 a. Presentation of Resolution of Appreciation to Public Service Award Recipient (CC) Mayor Kate presented the Proclamation to John Chung, Public Service Award Recipient for 2025 and John Chung provided comments.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

6. Public Hearings
a. Major Environmental and Design Review Permit and an Exception to Specified Hillside Development Standards for 287 Mountain View Avenue
Resolution to Approve a Major Environmental and Design Review (ED24-001) and Exception (EX24-003) to Specified Hillside Development Standards for a New SingleFamily Residence on a Hillside Lot with a Reduced Front Yard Setback, a Decreased Setback from the Garage, and a Reduction of One Required Off-Street Guest Parking Space at 287 Mountain View Avenue; APN 015-073-10; CEQA Determination: Exempt Pursuant To CEQA Guidelines 15061(B)(3) And 15303 (CED)
Planning Manager Margaret Kavanaugh-Lynch introduced Senior Planner Renee Nickenig who presented the Staff Report.

Staff recommended a modification to Condition No. 16 of the Resolution be modified as follows: “A minor temporary encroachment permit is required from the Department of Public Works prior to conducting any work within or any time the Public Right-of-Way (ROW) is restricted. This includes placing debris boxes, material delivery/storage, and or contractor vehicle parking that limits emergency vehicle access within the ROW. The submitted information for the encroachment permit shall include the construction management details on the proposed location and duration of debris boxes, material delivery/storage, and contractor vehicle parking. Encroachment permits can be applied for online on the city of San Rafael website: https://www.cityofsanrafael.org/encroachmentpermits/” Staff responded to questions from the City Council.

Mayor Kate invited the applicant to provide comments.

Mayor Kate invited public comment.

Speaker: Matt Bennett
Staff responded to questions.

City Council provided comments.

Councilmember Hill moved and Councilmember Kertz seconded to adopt the Resolution to Approve a Major Environmental and Design Review (ED24-001) and Exception (EX24-003) to Specified Hillside Development Standards for a New Single-Family Residence on a Hillside Lot with a Reduced Front Yard Setback, a Decreased Setback from the Garage, and a Reduction of One Required Off-Street Guest Parking Space at 287 Mountain View Avenue; APN 015-073-10 with modifications as presented by staff. 8 AYES: Councilmembers: Kertz, Hill, Llorens Gulati & Mayor Kate NOES: Councilmembers: None
ABSENT: Councilmembers: Bushey
Resolution 15398 (AS AMENDED) - Resolution to Approve a Major Environmental and Design Review (ED24-001) and Exception (EX24-003) to Specified Hillside Development Standards for a New Single-Family Residence on a Hillside Lot with a Reduced Front Yard Setback, a Decreased Setback from the Garage, and a Reduction of One Required Off-Street Guest Parking Space at 287 Mountain View Avenue; APN 015-073-10; CEQA Determination: Exempt Pursuant To CEQA Guidelines 15061(B)(3) And 15303 (CED)
b. Evaluation of Existing Camping Regulations, Sanctioned Camping Area Informational Update, and Chapter 19.50 of the San Rafael Municipal Code, Camping on Public Property Existing Camping Regulation Evaluation, Sanctioned Camping Area Update, and Introduction of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Rafael Amending Chapter 19.50 to the San Rafael Municipal Code, Entitled “Camping on Public Property” to Prohibit Camping in Parks (CM) CEQA Determination: Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15061(B)(3), 15307 and 15308
City Manager Cristine Alilovich, Assistant City Manager John Stefanski and Daniel Cooperman presented the Staff Report.

Staff responded to questions from the City Council.

Mayor Kate invited public comment.

Speakers: John Bischoff, Mark Shotwell, Ritter Center CEO, Jason Sarris, Lived Experience Advisory Board, John Reynolds, Sara McEvoy, Name withheld, Name withheld, Jane Hivin, Bob Mittelstaedt, Gabrielle Wain, Lauren, Molly Blauvelt, and Daniel Bacon City Council provided comments.

Councilmember Hill moved and Councilmember Llorens Gulati seconded to introduce the Ordinance, waive further reading of the Ordinance, and refer to it by title only.

AYES: Councilmembers: Hill, Llorens Gulati & Mayor Kate NOES: Councilmembers: Kertz
ABSENT: Councilmembers: Bushey
The City Clerk read the title of the Ordinance:

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AMENDING CHAPTER 19.50 TO THE SAN RAFAEL MUNICIPAL CODE, ENTITLED “CAMPING ON PUBLIC PROPERTY” TO PROHIBIT CAMPING IN PARKS
Introduced the Ordinance, waived further reading of the Ordinance, and referred to it by title only

OPEN TIME FOR PUBLIC EXPRESSION
• Name withheld addressed the City Council regarding spreading empathy.

ADJOURNMENT:

Mayor Kate adjourned the meeting at 8:18 pm.
9 __________________________
LINDSAY LARA, City Clerk
APPROVED THIS _____DAY OF____________, 2025
_____________________________________
KATE COLIN, Mayor
____________________________________________________________________________________

FOR CITY CLERK ONLY
Council Meeting:

Disposition:

Agenda Item No: 4.b
Meeting Date: April 21, 2025

SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Department: City Clerk’s Office
Prepared by: Lindsay Lara, City Clerk City Manager Approval: __________ TOPIC: STATEMENT OF ECONOMIC INTERESTS ANNUAL FILINGS
SUBJECT: ACCEPT REPORT ON FAIR POLITICAL PRACTICES COMMISSION FORM 700, STATEMENT OF ECONOMIC INTERESTS, 2024 ANNUAL FILINGS FOR

DESIGNATED EMPLOYEES AND CONSULTANTS
RECOMMENDATION: Accept the report.

BACKGROUND:

On September 3, 2024, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 15339, updating the City’s Conflict of Interest Code for Designated Employees in compliance with requirements set forth by the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC).

Pursuant to this code, all designated employees and consultants are required to file an annual FPPC Form 700, Statement of Economic Interests, by April 1 of each year. The purpose of this filing is to promote transparency and prevent conflicts of interest by requiring public officials and designated employees to disclose their financial interests. Filing of the Form 700 ensures that decision-making is conducted in the public’s best interest, in compliance with the California Political Reform Act.

ANALYSIS:

For the 2024 filing year, 98% of designated employees and consultants filed their Form 700s on time. Two consultants have not yet submitted their forms and are currently subject to late penalties under FPPC regulations. The City Clerk’s Office has issued the first of two formal nonfiler notifications to these individuals.

As part of its compliance review, the City Clerk’s Office conducted a 20% random audit of ontime filings and a 100% review of all late submissions. No amendments were required as a result of this review. All submitted forms are publicly available for review in the City Clerk’s Office and on the online.

In addition, beginning January 1, 2025, the FPPC now requires all 87200 filers—including the Mayor, City Councilmembers, City Manager, City Treasurer/Finance Director, and City Attorney—to file directly through the FPPC’s electronic filing system. While these filings are no longer processed through the City Clerk’s Office, staff has manually uploaded copies to the City’s transparency portal to ensure continued local access for San Rafael residents. All 87200 filers submitted their forms by April 1, 2025, deadline. One Planning Commissioner filed after the deadline and has since come into compliance.

ATTACHMENTS: None.

ORDINANCE NO. 2046

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AMENDING CHAPTER 19.50 TO THE SAN RAFAEL MUNICIPAL CODE, ENTITLED “CAMPING ON PUBLIC PROPERTY” TO PROHIBIT CAMPING IN PARKS
SECTION 1. FINDINGS
The City Council having reviewed and taken into consideration all written and oral information submitted in this matter and after a properly noticed public hearing makes the following findings in support of this Ordinance:

WHEREAS, the City of San Rafael has implemented a Sanctioned Camping Area on City public property as part of its comprehensive approach to address homelessness within the City; and WHEREAS, the SCA addresses safety and security, through gates, fencing, security guards and fire prevention (e.g., placement of fire extinguishers and regular inspections); living and meeting spaces, through specified tent sizes, temporary and housing/outreach staff storage units, and meeting space canopies; and sanitation, though portable restrooms with handwashing stations, garbage pick up and designated smoking and pet use areas; and WHEREAS, residents of the SCA receive housing and case management and outreach services, weekly showers, and other services and have to abide by to a code of conduct; and WHEREAS, in less than six months since the SCA began operations, at least one individual has secured permanent housing and another five individuals have secured employment; and WHEREAS, the Sanctioned Camping Area is regulated and structured in a manner not only to mitigate public health and safety risks to both its residents and the community at large, but also to promote the well-being of its residents; and
WHEREAS, over 90% of all wildfires in this country are human caused. In Marin, given the low lightening frequency, that number is likely closer to 99%. Reducing potential ignition sources is a key wildfire risk reduction activity. Campfires and open flames, including those for warming and cooking, and discarded smoking materials can easily ignite dry grasses and brush in open space and parks. These ignitions can lead to wildfires that threaten both the individuals and the surrounding community: and
WHEREAS, camping in parks creates heightened fire risks due to the use of open flames for cooking and warmth, and the potential for improperly discarded smoking materials, particularly in areas with dry vegetation or brush that could easily ignite and lead to wildfires threatening both unhoused individuals and the surrounding community; and WHEREAS, unregulated encampments typically lack the resources and facilities to safely manage fires, further increasing the associated risks; and WHEREAS, recent fire incidents elsewhere in the state, such as the January 2025 fires in Southern California, with the Palisades Fire burning 23,707 acres and the Eaton Fire burning 14,021 acres, have heightened public awareness and sensitivity to these risks; and WHEREAS, on February 24, 2025, Cal Fire released its updated Fire Hazard Severity Zones map, which designated City parks within Fire Hazard Severity Zones, including but not limited to Gerstle, Sun Valley, Peacock Gap, Victor Jones, Santa Margarita, Jerry Russom Memorial, and Terra Linda parks; and
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 51179 requires the City to adopt an ordinance designating moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones in its jurisdiction within 120 days of the release of the aforementioned map released by Cal Fire; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Government Code Section 51176, the purpose of Fire Hazard Severity Zones map is to classify lands in the state in accordance with whether a very high fire hazard is present so that public officials are able to identify measures that will retard the rate of spread, and reduce the potential intensity, of uncontrolled fires that threaten to destroy resources, life, or property, and to require that those measures be taken; and.

WHEREAS, upon evaluating potential amendments to Chapter 19.50 to prohibit camping within Fire Hazard Severity Zones, staff determined that, when combined with existing camping prohibitions at Albert Park, Boyd Park, and the Falkirk Cultural Center/Menzies Lot, such amendments would effectively prohibit camping in a majority of City parks; and WHEREAS, including all city parks in a camping prohibition offers clarity for parks that may fall partially within a hazard zone, includes parks in the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) but not hazard zone, and assures that the few potentially excluded parks do not become areas for encampments. Given the behavior of embers and their ability to quickly spread fire, ignition could quickly result in a fire in the WUI or Fire Hazard Severity Zone; and
WHEREAS, the City Council declines to prohibit camping in all of the hazard severity zones due to mitigating factors, reporting and response times, and land ownership; and.

WHEREAS, the City regularly patrols its parks and based on those patrols, finds that as of the date of the Administrative Order dated March 27, 2025, there were no individuals camping in its parks; and
WHEREAS, by amending the City’s camping regulations, the City’s goal is to effectively regulate and enforce camping laws for the health and safety of all the public, including residents who are experiencing homelessness, and to mitigate the risk of displacement of individuals by undertaking such an amendment when there has been no camping in the parks; and WHEREAS, for the reasons set forth above, this Ordinance is declared by the City Council to be necessary to protect public health, safety, and welfare; preserve public property for the enjoyment and safety of all members of the public; enhance and preserve the orderly administration and management of public property; and preserve, protect, and prevent damage to public resources, and the recitals above taken together constitute the City Council’s statement of the reasons for adopting this Ordinance.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 2. AMENDMENTS TO SAN RAFAEL MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 19.50 Chapter 19.50 of the San Rafael Municipal Code, entitled “Camping of Public Property” is hereby amended as follows, with addition shown in underlined and deletions shown with strikethrough:

Chapter 19.50 - CAMPING ON PUBLIC PROPERTY

19.50.010. - Purpose.

The purposes of this chapter include but are not limited to: protecting public health, safety, and welfare; preserving public property for the enjoyment and safety of all members of the public; enhancing and preserving the orderly administration and management of public property; and preserving, protecting, and preventing damage to public resources. This chapter prohibits conduct that unreasonably interferes with the administration and lawful uses of public property by establishing reasonable time, place, and manner conditions related to camping on public property.

19.50.020 - Definitions.

As used in this chapter, the following terms shall have the following meanings:

A. "Camp" or "Camping" means use of space on public property for living accommodation purposes such as sleeping activities, or making preparations to sleep (including the laying down of bedding for the purpose of sleeping), or storing personal belongings, or using any tents or shelter or other structure or vehicle for sleeping. The above-listed activities constitute camping when it reasonably appears, in light of all the circumstances, that the participants, in conducting these activities, are using the area as a living accommodation regardless of the nature of any other activities in which they may also be engaging.

B. "Camp paraphernalia" means implements and equipment used for camping, including tents, cots, beds, hammocks, vehicles, other temporary physical shelters, tarpaulins, mattresses, sleeping bags, bedrolls, blankets, sheets, pillows, and cookware or cooking equipment.

C. "Campsite" means the primary physical area of occupation of one person camping or up to four persons camping together, inclusive of camp facilities, camp paraphernalia, and personal property.

D. "Open space property" means any area described in San Rafael Municipal Code Section

19.10.020. The city will maintain on its public website and in hard copy at the City Clerk's office a map of all open space property meeting this definition. “Park” means any area described in area described in San Rafael Municipal Code Section 19.20.020(I). The city will maintain on its public website and in hard copy at the City Clerk’s office a map of all parks meeting this definition.

E. "Playground" means an improved outdoor area designed, equipped, and set aside for children's play in a park or school that is not intended for use as an athletic playing field or athletic court, and also includes any playground equipment, fall zones, surface materials, access ramps, and all areas within and including any designated enclosure and barriers.

F. "Public facility" means any building or structure on public property, whether secured, unsecured, locked, unlocked, open, or enclosed, as well as any area of public property enclosed by a locked fence.

G. "Public property" means any real property within the jurisdiction of the City of San Rafael, which is owned, managed, or controlled by the City of San Rafael.

H. "Public right-of-way" means land which by written instrument, usage or process of law is owned by, reserved for or dedicated to the public use for street or highway purposes, or other transportation purposes, whether or not such land is actually being used or developed specifically for those purposes.

I. "Public utility infrastructure" means public bathrooms or infrastructure and equipment used to provide public utility services, including electricity, gas, water, stormwater, telecommunications, and sanitation services.

J. "School" means any public or private institution of educational learning up to and including grade 12.

K. "Sidewalk" means any area in the city provided for the use of pedestrians, including planting areas, driveway approaches, and parking strips, between the public vehicular roadway and the edge of public right-of-way bordering, fronting, or adjacent to private real property.

L. "Store" means to put aside or accumulate for use when needed, to put for safekeeping, or to place or leave in a location.

M. "Vehicle" means any wheeled conveyance, whether motor-powered or self­ propelled, and includes any trailer in tow of any size, kind, or description.

19.50.030 - Prohibited Camping on Certain Public Property.

A. Prohibited Camping

1. Open space property Park. No person or persons shall camp in or on any open space property park, or portion thereof.

2. Parking garages. No person or persons shall camp in or on the premises of any parking garage, or portion thereof, owned or operated by the city.

3. Public facilities. No person or persons shall camp in or on any public facility, or portion thereof, or in a manner that obstructs, blocks, or otherwise interferes with access to a public facility or private real property.

4. Playgrounds. No person or persons shall camp within 100 feet of any playground.

5. Schools. No person or persons shall camp within 250 feet of the property boundary of any school.

6. Public right-of-way and sidewalks. No person or persons shall camp in or on any public right-of-way or sidewalk, or portion thereof, or in a manner that obstructs, blocks, or otherwise interferes with use of or access to a public right-of-way or sidewalk.

B. The city council or city manager may, by resolution or administrative order, absolutely prohibit camping, or adopt time, place, or manner conditions on camping, at any time in or on one or more public properties, or portion thereof.

C. The city shall maintain on its public website and in hard copy at the city clerk's office a current citywide map of all public property parcels prohibited to camping by subsections (A)(1), (A)(2), (A)(4), (A)(5), and (B) of this section 19.50.030.

19.50.040 - Prohibited Camping on Other Public Property; Exception.

A. As to public property not listed as prohibited for camping under Section 19.50.030, no person shall camp on such other public property, except as set forth below.

B. Time, place, and manner conditions:

1. Campsite size and occupancy.
a. No campsite occupied by one person shall exceed an area of 200 sq. ft., inclusive camp paraphernalia, and personal property.
b. No campsite occupied by more than one person shall i) exceed an occupancy of four persons or ii) exceed an area of 400 sq. ft., inclusive of camp paraphernalia, and personal property.
c. All camp paraphernalia, and other personal property shall be stored and kept within the maximum permitted campsite area.
d. Items stored or discarded outside of the maximum permitted campsite area shall be presumed to be unattended personal property or trash or debris and may be stored or discarded by the city.
e. No person shall establish or occupy more than one campsite.

2. Clearance and setbacks.
a. A minimum clearance of 10 feet around all sides of any campsite allowed under this section shall be maintained free and clear of trash, debris, and personal property, including but not limited to camp facilities and camp paraphernalia. Items stored or discarded within the 10-foot clearance area shall be presumed to be unattended personal property or trash or debris and may be stored or discarded by the city.
b. No campsite may be established or occupied within 10 feet of any other campsite allowed by this section, public utility infrastructure, or private real property, including a fence of such property.
c. No campsite may be established or occupied within 5 feet of the edge of pavement of a roadway open to the use of the public for purposes of vehicular traffic.

3.Unpermitted structures and building materials. No person shall occupy, construct, or erect on public property, or affix or tie to public or private property, any building, shed, shack, fence, or other structure made of building material, or store any building material on public property for camping. For purposes of this paragraph, “building material” includes wood, steel, concrete, stone, brick, masonry, plastic, cement composites, glass, sand, or other similar material of a type and quantity normally used for construction purposes.
a. Exception: Fabric tents, fabric tarps, or other similar non-permanent, removable items may be used for temporary shelter within a campsite, provided they are not affixed or tied to any public property, private real property, vegetation, or infrastructure, except for the use of removable stakes to secure the item to unimproved ground on public property.
b. Exception: Removable plastic pallets or sandbags may be used to temporarily raise a tent or other camp facility off of the ground, provided that such items are not affixed or tied to any public property, private real property, vegetation, or infrastructure.

19.50.050 - Violations; Enforcement.

A. In addition to enforcement as described below, the City may enforce this chapter pursuant to chapters 1.42, 1.44, and 1.46; provided, however, that no person shall be charged with a criminal violation unless their unlawful conduct is knowing or willful.

B. The city manager or their designee shall be responsible for enforcement of this chapter.

C. For a violation of section 19.50.030(A)-(B), the city manager or their designee may require the person in violation to immediately cease the prohibited camping.

D. For violation of section 19.50.040(B)(1)-(2), related to the size, occupancy, and clearance or setbacks of a campsite, the person camping shall be given 48 hours to come into compliance with this chapter. The city manager or their designee shall provide upon request a physical demarcation of the allowed boundary to assist the person camping to comply with this chapter.

E. Unpermitted structure. For a violation of section 19.50.040(B)(3), related to an unpermitted structure, the structure shall be tagged with a notice to remove the structure from public property within 48 hours. If the noticed structure is not removed from public property within 48 hours of notice, the city manager or their designee may immediately remove such structure and restore the public property.

F. Exigent Circumstances. For a violation of section 19.50.040(B)(1)-(2) whereby there is an imminent threat to life, health, safety or infrastructure such that exigent circumstances require immediate action, the City Manager or their designee may require the person in violation to immediately cure the violation. The City Manager or their designee shall provide as much advance notice as reasonable under the circumstances.

19.50.060 - Conflict with Other Regulations.

To the extent that there is any conflict with any other provisions of this code, the standards and regulations of this chapter shall prevail.

SECTION 3. COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA
This Ordinance was assessed in accordance with the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the environmental regulations of the city. The City Council hereby finds that under section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, this Ordinance is exempt from the requirements of CEQA because it can be seen with certainty that the provisions contained herein would not have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. It also finds the Ordinance is exempt from the requirements of CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines sections 15307 and 15308 as an action by a regulatory agency taken to protect the environment and natural resources.

SECTION 4. SEVERABILITY
Every section, paragraph, clause, and phrase of this Ordinance is hereby declared to be severable. If for any reason, any section, paragraph, clause, or phrase is held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining sections, paragraphs, clauses or phrases, and the remaining portions or this Ordinance shall continue in full force and effect unless amended or modified by the city.

SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE AND PUBLICATION
This Ordinance shall be published once, in full or in summary form, before its final passage, in a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of San Rafael and shall be in full force and effect 30 days after its adoption. If published in summary form, the summary shall also be published within fifteen (15) days after the adoption, together with the names of those Councilmembers voting for or against same, in a newspaper of general circulation published and circulated in the City of San Rafael, County of Marin, State of California.

Within fifteen (15) days after adoption, the City Clerk shall also post in the office of the City Clerk, a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance along with the names of those Councilmembers voting for and against the Ordinance.

THE FOREGOING ORDINANCE was first read and introduced at a regular meeting of the San Rafael City Council on the 7th day of April 2025, and was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the San Rafael City Council on the 21st of April 2025, by the following vote, to wit:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
________________________
Kate Colin, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________
Lindsay Lara, City Clerk
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 2046

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN
RAFAEL AMENDING CHAPTER 19.50 TO THE SAN RAFAEL
MUNICIPAL CODE, ENTITLED “CAMPING ON PUBLIC PROPERTY”
This Summary concerns a proposed ordinance of the City of San Rafael, designated as Ordinance No. 2046, which will amend Chapter 19.50 of the San Rafael Municipal Code. Ordinance No. 2046 is scheduled for adoption by the San Rafael City Council at its regular meeting of April 21, 2025. The City Clerk has been directed to publish this Summary pursuant to City Charter and California Government Code section 36933(c)(1).

SUMMARY OF AMENDMENT TO MUNICIPAL CODE
Ordinance No. 2046 will amend regulations governing camping on public property in the City of San Rafael. The proposed ordinance amends Chapter 19.50 of the San Rafael Municipal Code to prohibit camping in all City parks. The proposed ordinance accomplishes this prohibition by replacing “open space property” with “parks” as defined in San Rafael Municipal Code Section 19.20.020(I) since that definition of parks includes both parks and open space.

Copies of Ordinance No. 2046 are available for public review on the City’s website: https://www.cityofsanrafael.org. You may also contact the City Clerk at (415) 485-3066 for information.
________________________________

LINDSAY LARA
San Rafael City Clerk
Dated: 4/11/2025
____________________________________________________________________________________

FOR CITY CLERK ONLY
Council Meeting:

Disposition:

SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Department: City Manager, Sustainability Division
Prepared by: Kate Hagemann
Climate Adaptation and Resilience
Planner
City Manager Approval: ___
TOPIC: CANAL ALLIANCE AND THE MULTICULTURAL CENTER OF MARIN

AGREEMENT AMENDMENTS
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO AMEND THE CONTRACTS

FOR THE CANAL COMMUNITY RESILIENCE PLANNING PROJECT WITH CANAL

ALLIANCE TO AMEND THE SCOPE OF WORK, EXTEND THE TERM AND INCREASE THE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT BY $13,750 FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $231,400 AND WITH THE MULTICULTURAL CENTER OF MARIN

TO AMEND THE SCOPE OF WORK, EXTEND THE TERM AND INCREASE THE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT BY $74,797 FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $236,797
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to amend the contracts for the Canal Community Resilience Planning Project with Canal Alliance to amend the scope of work, extend the term, and increase the not to exceed amount by $13,750 for a total not to exceed of $231,400 and with the Multicultural Center of Marin to amend the scope of work, extend the term and increase the not to exceed amount by $74,797 for a total amount not to exceed $236,797.

BACKGROUND:

Over the past two years, the City, community organizations, and other agencies have been working collaboratively to understand the implications of subsidence and sea level rise on local flooding risks. In 2022, the City and project partners were awarded grant funding from the California State Coastal Conservancy and the Marin Community Foundation to support adaptation planning to prepare for sea level rise. At the November 22, 2022, meeting, the City Council voted to accept the award of grant funding from the Conservancy and Marin Community Foundation. At the December 19, 2022, meeting, the City Council voted to approve the professional services agreements with Canal Alliance and the Multicultural Center of Marin to complete their portions of the grant scope of work. In June 2023, the City and project partners successfully secured another grant from the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, which has since been renamed the Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation.

At the July 17, 2023, meeting, the City Council voted to accept this award of grant funding and authorized the City Manager to negotiate and enter into Professional Service Agreements for the Agenda Item No: 4.d
Meeting Date: April 21, 2025
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 2
Project, including agreements with Canal Alliance and the Multicultural Center of Marin.

ANALYSIS:

In February 2025, the Coastal Conservancy grant was extended. Therefore, additional funding is available for the community-based organizations, Canal Alliance and the Multicultural Center of Marin, to continue their work and participation in the Project through the extension. To enable this, the existing Professional Services Agreements need to be amended to reflect the new grant timeline and scope and to add compensation. Additionally, a small adjustment to the Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation grant budget needs to be reflected in the agreement with the Multicultural Center of Marin.

Therefore, staff recommends amending these agreements to reflect these changes.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The recommendation in this report would authorize increases to current agreements with Canal Alliance and the Multicultural Center of Marin of $13,750 and $74,797, respectively. This work is directly supported by various local and state grants. Funding to support the recommended contract amendments is provided through available appropriations in the Fiscal Year (FY) 2024-25 budget (Fund 283 - Other Grants). In addition, the City continues to provide in-kind support through staff time and retains a portion of grant funding to cover indirect expenses for overseeing and administering these grants.

OPTIONS:

The City Council has the following options to consider relating to this item:

1. Adopt the resolution as presented.

2. Adopt the resolution with amendments.

3. Direct staff to return with additional information.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to amend the contracts for the Canal Community Resilience Planning Project with Canal Alliance to amend the scope of work, extend the term, and increase the not to exceed amount by $13,750 for a total not to exceed of $231,400 and with the Multicultural Center of Marin to amend the scope of work, extend the term and increase the not to exceed amount by $74,797 for a total amount not to exceed $236,797.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution

2. Draft PSA amendment with Canal Alliance

3. Draft PSA amendment with the Multicultural Center of Marin RESOLUTION NO.

RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO AMEND THE CONTRACTS

FOR THE CANAL COMMUNITY RESILIENCE PLANNING PROJECT WITH CANAL

ALLIANCE TO AMEND THE SCOPE OF WORK, EXTEND THE TERM AND INCREASE THE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT BY $13,750 FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $231,400 AND WITH THE MULTICULTURAL CENTER OF MARIN TO AMEND THE

SCOPE OF WORK, EXTEND THE TERM AND INCREASE THE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT BY $74,797 FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $236,797 WHEREAS, the San Rafael Climate Adaptation Planning Collaborative is a collaborative effort between the Canal Alliance, the Multicultural Center of Marin, the County of Marin, the City of San Rafael, and researchers at the University of California, Berkeley; and WHEREAS, the San Rafael Climate Adaptation Planning Collaborative has been awarded grant funds to support this effort from the Marin Community Foundation, the State Coastal Conservancy, and the Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation; and WHEREAS, the State Coastal Conservancy grant will be extended, and additional time, budget, and effort is needed to continue that project to successful completion; and WHEREAS, the existing Professional Services Agreements with project partners Canal Alliance and the Multicultural Center of Marin need to be amended to reflect the updated grant schedule, budget, and scope of work;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of San Rafael hereby finds the foregoing recitals are true and correct and authorizes the City Manager: to amend the contracts for the Canal Community Resilience Planning Project with Canal Alliance to amend the scope of work, extend the term and increase the not to exceed amount by $13,750, for a total amount not to exceed $231,400 and for the Multicultural Center of Marin to amend the scope of work, extend the term and increase the not to exceed amount by $74,797, for a total amount not to exceed $236,797 to continue their work on sea level rise planning grants.

I, LINDSAY LARA, Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of San Rafael, held on Monday, the 21st day of April 2025, by the following vote, to wit:

AYES: Councilmembers:

NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:
_____________________
Lindsay Lara, City Clerk
1 FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH

CANAL ALLIANCE FOR EDUCATION AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

SERVICES
THIS FIRSTAMENDMENT to the Professional Services Agreement by and between the CITY OF SAN RAFAEL (hereinafter “CITY”), and CANAL ALLIANCE (hereinafter “CONSULTANT”), is made and entered into as of the _____________________.

RECITALS
WHEREAS, the CITY and CONSULTANT entered into a Professional Services Agreement dated October 26, 2023 to perform professional services in connection with CITY’S Sea Level Rise Feasibility Study, for an amount not to exceed $120,000 for activities and deliverables related to the State Coastal Conservancy grant and an amount not to exceed $97,650 for activities and deliverables related to the Office of Planning and Research Grant, for a total amount not to exceed $217,650 (the “Agreement”); and
WHEREAS, the State Coastal Conservancy grant has been extended and the CITY and CONSULTANT desire to amend the Agreement to conform with the grant extension timeline; and
WHEREAS, the CITY requires additional professional services from the CONSULTANT to meet the grant extension requirements, and the CONSULTANT is willing to provide such services; and
WHEREAS, under the terms of the Agreement, the Term of the Agreement was to expire on April 30, 2025; however CITY and CONSULTANT now wish to extend the Term of the Agreement.

AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereby agree to amend the Agreement as follows:

1. Article I of the Agreement, entitled “SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED” is hereby amended to include the additional services set forth in CONSULTANT’s proposal dated March 24, 2025, attached to this First Amendment as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference.
2 2. Article II of the Agreement, entitled “COMPENSATION” is hereby amended to include additional compensation payable to CONSULTANT for the services described in Exhibit A to this First Amendment, on time and materials basis in accordance with the Exhibit A, in a not-to-exceed amount of $13,750 for activities and deliverables related to the State Coastal Conservancy grant, and to change the total not-to-exceed amount under the Agreement to $231,400.

3. Article III of the Agreement, entitled “TERM OF AGREEMENT” is hereby amended, to extend the Agreement term to December 31, 2025.

4. Except as specifically amended herein, all of the other provisions, terms and obligations of the Agreement between the parties shall remain valid and shall be in full force.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this First Amendment on the day, month, and year first above written.

CITY OF SAN RAFAEL CONSULTANT
______________________________ By:______________________________ CRISTINE ALILOVICH, City Manager
Aaron Burnett
Director of Policy & Civic Engagement
ATTEST:
______________________________
LINDSAY LARA, City Clerk
By:_____________________________
APPROVED AS TO FORM: Karen Rodriguez, Chief Financial Officer Chief Financial Officer
______________________________

ANDREA VISVESHWARA,
Chief Assistant City Attorney
3 Exhibit A
Proposal submitted by Canal Alliance on March 24, 2025
Part 1: State Coastal Conservancy Grant Scope and Budget (Amendment) Part 1 Scope (Amendment):

The following tasks are in addition to the original scope of work Task 2 Community-Informed Technical Feasibility Study
The Consultant will participate in meetings with the engineering consultants and provide verbal and written feedback on their draft study deliverables. The Consultant will also review written documents and provide recommendations on how to better align the study with community priorities.

Deliverables: written feedback on draft study deliverables and participating in meetings Task 4.1 Community Development
The Consultant will develop and publish additional creative communications such as social media postings, videos, radio programs or similar as deemed appropriate. The Consultant will co-host and organize one additional community block party and other events as resources allow. The Consultant will also produce a summary video of the project and engagement to date.

Deliverables: copies of outreach and presentation materials from community events and documentation of creative communications
Task 4.3 Steering Committee
The Consultant will host and organize four additional steering committee meetings. This includes planning the meeting agenda, coordinating speakers and steering committee attendance, and organizing supporting activities such as interpretation.

Deliverables: meeting agendas, attendance logs, and meeting notes Task 4.5: Technical Advisory Committee
The Consultant will attend and help organize additional meetings of the Technical Advisory Committee.

Deliverable: meeting agenda, attendance log, and meeting notes Part A Budget:

A. State Coastal Conservancy Scope of Work and Budget
4 This budget supersedes the existing Part A budget in the original professional services agreement and reflects the new totals.

Task or Activity Original Amount New Total Amount Change Staff time [1]
Task 1: Project Management $34,270 $34,270 $0
Task 2: Technical Feasibility Study $10,200 $11,000 $800 Task 3: Staff and Partner Trainings $0 $0 $0
Task 4: Community Engagement $44,250 $54,800 $10,550
Task 5: Local Plan Integration $17,800 $17,800 $0
Task 6: Effectiveness Evaluation and
Analysis
$5,880 $5,880 $0
Staff Total $112,400 123,750 $11,350
Direct costs [2] $7,600 $10,000 $2,400
Project Total $120,000 $133,750 $13,750
[1] Staff costs billed at a rate per hour of $70 for Director of Advocacy and Policy and a rate of $52 for the Policy Analyst. These staff costs can be adjusted to reflect an annual cost of living adjustment not to exceed the consumer price index. The CPI increase would be calculated using the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ annual CPI estimates for the Bay Area. [2] Direct costs: for expenses related to community workshops, steering committee meetings, focus groups, and large community events.
[3] Funding for Task 3 is being provided by another source and is not being provided by these grant funds.
1 FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH THE MULTICULTURAL CENTER OF MARIN, INC. FOR EDUCATION AND

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT SERVICES
THIS FIRST AMENDMENT to the Professional Services Agreement by and between the CITY OF SAN RAFAEL (hereinafter “CITY”), and THE MULTICULTURAL CENTER OF MARIN, INC. (hereinafter “CONSULTANT”), is made and entered into as of ____________________________.

RECITALS
WHEREAS, the CITY and CONSULTANT entered into a Professional Services Agreement dated January 19, 2023 to perform professional services in connection with CITY’S Canal Community Resilience Planning Project, for an amount not to exceed $162,000 (the “Agreement”); and
WHEREAS, the CITY is in receipt of grants from the State Coastal Conservancy and the Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation and the timeline for the Canal Community Resilience Planning Project has been extended; and WHEREAS, under the terms of the Agreement, the Term of the Agreement was to expire on April 30, 2025; however, CITY and CONSULTANT now wish to extend the Term of the Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the CITY requires additional professional services from the CONSULTANT to meet the grant extension requirements, and the CONSULTANT is willing to provide such services.

AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereby agree to amend the Agreement as follows:

1. Article I of the Agreement, entitled “SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED” is hereby amended to include the additional services set forth in CONSULTANT’s proposal dated March 24, 2025, attached to this First Amendment as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference.

2. Article II of the Agreement, entitled “COMPENSATION” is hereby amended to include additional compensation payable to CONSULTANT for the services 2 described in Exhibit A to this First Amendment, on a time and materials basis, in accordance with the Exhibit A, in a not-to-exceed amount of $11,989.75 for services performed under the State Coastal Conservancy Grant and $62,807 for services performed under the Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation grant, and to change the total not-to-exceed amount under the Agreement to $236,796.75.

3. Article III of the Agreement, entitled “TERM OF AGREEMENT” is hereby amended, to extend the Agreement term to December 31, 2025.

4. Except as specifically amended herein, all of the other provisions, terms and obligations of the Agreement between the parties shall remain valid and shall be in full force.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this First Amendment on the day, month, and year first above written.

CITY OF SAN RAFAEL CONSULTANT
______________________________ By:______________________________ CRISTINE ALILOVICH, City Manager

LISA BENNETT,
Executive Director
ATTEST:
______________________________
LINDSAY LARA, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________

ANDREA VISVESHWARA,
Chief Assistant City Attorney
3 Exhibit A
Proposal submitted by the Multicultural Center of Marin on March 24, 2025 Part 1: State Coastal Conservancy Grant Scope and Budget (Amendment) Part 1 Scope (Amendment):

The following tasks are in addition to the original scope of work Task 2 Community-Informed Technical Feasibility Study
The Consultant will participate in meetings with the engineering consultants and provide verbal and written feedback on their draft study deliverables. The Consultant will also review written documents and provide recommendations on how to better align the study with community priorities.

Deliverables: written feedback on draft study deliverables and participating in meetings Task 4.1 Community Development
The Consultant will develop and publish additional creative communications such as social media postings, videos, radio programs or similar as deemed appropriate. The Consultant will co-host and organize one additional community block party and other events as resources allow. The Consultant will also produce a summary video of the project and engagement to date.

Deliverables: copies of outreach and presentation materials from community events and documentation of creative communications
Task 4.3 Steering Committee:

The Consultant will host and organize four additional steering committee meetings. This includes planning the meeting agenda, coordinating speakers and steering committee attendance, and organizing supporting activities such as interpretation.

Deliverables: meeting agendas, attendance logs, and meeting notes Task 4.5: Technical Advisory Committee
The Consultant will attend and help organize an additional meeting of the Technical Advisory Committee.

Deliverables: meeting agenda, attendance log, and meeting notes 4 Part 1 Budget:

This budget supersedes the existing budget in the original professional services agreement and reflects the new totals.

Task or Activity Original Amount New Total Amount Change Staff time [1]
Task 1: Project Management $34,800 $34,800 $0
Task 2: Technical Feasibility Study $7,500 $8,500 $1,000 Task 3: Staff and Partner Trainings $18,700 $19589.75 $889.75 Task 4: Community Engagement $58,900 $73,500 $6,989.75
Task 5: Local Plan Integration $8,500 $4,000 ($4,500)
Task 6: Effectiveness Evaluation and
Analysis
$5,200 $5,200 $0
Staff Total $133,600 $145,589.75 $11,989.75
Direct costs [2] $28,400 $28,400 $0
Project Total $162,000 $173,989.75 $11,989.75
[1] Staff costs billed at a rate per hour of $72 for Executive Director, $54 for Director of Marketing, $57 for Community Resilience Manger, and $52 for the Policy Coordinator. These staff costs can be adjusted to reflect an annual cost of living adjustment not to exceed the consumer price index. The CPI increase would be calculated using the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ annual CPI estimates for the Bay Area.
[2] Direct costs: for expenses related to community workshops, steering committee meetings, focus groups, and large community events.
5 Part 2: Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation Grant Scope and Budget Part 2 Scope:

Task 2: Vulnerability assessment including community asset mapping Task 2 Subtask B: Community Assets Mapping
The Multicultural Center of Marin will lead community asset mapping with Canal residents. This will be a crucial input to the vulnerability analysis and prioritization of actions. These structured conversations will help ensure that residents' main concerns are brought out early in the process to inform the analysis from the beginning. While there will be a discussion of climate risks there will also be a focus on the positive social and community assets that are most important to quality of life and ensuring residents feel safe, well, and connected to their community.

Task 2 Subtask B Deliverables:
• Community events hosted (minimum 3)
• Bilingual video summary of events completed;
• Written summary of community events completed;
• Summary of community input to be integrated into the vulnerability assessment Task 3: Prioritizing adaptation actions in concert with the community engagement Task 3, Subtask A Community engagement to discuss adaptation priorities The Multicultural Center of Marin will lead additional engagement, which will build directly on the community asset mapping to share the vulnerability analysis results and discuss which challenges residents feel should be prioritized moving forward.

Task 3 Subtask A Deliverables:
• Community events hosted (minimum 3)
• Community events summarized in a short bilingual video; • Written summary of adaptation priorities drafted and integrated into 3b.

Task 3, Subtask B Community engagement to discuss adaptation priorities The Consultant will work with the Project Team to build directly on the community's expressed priorities and the findings from the vulnerability analysis. This task would rank and prioritize adaptation measures where they are most needed to ensure that infrastructure (including community infrastructure) can continue to provide essential services. Measures would be evaluated based on criteria developed collaboratively but would likely include their criticality, vulnerability, public health and safety implications, costs, and co-benefits identified in 3A.

Task 3, Subtask B Deliverables:
• Contributions and review of the final report
6 Task 4 Final adaptation actions
Task 4, Subtask A: Final Recommendations
All prior project activities will feed directly into the development of the final recommendations, which will present a prioritized set of actionable adaptation actions. This will also include policy recommendations that would best address the Canal community's adaptation priorities identified through this planning process. The Consultant will work with the Project Team.

Task 4, Subtask A: Deliverables:
• Contributions to and review of the final report
Task 4, Subtask B: Community engagement
All project partners will be involved in hosting the final community engagements, which focus on sharing the results and seeking the community's input on the most important adaptation actions that should be prioritized. The Consultant will support these events and help promote them.

Task 4 Subtask B Deliverables:
• Community engagements held
• Final summary of community priorities written
• Provide written input on how the final recommendations can be changed to better reflect community priorities
Task 5 Track Progress
The City of San Rafael will coordinate project partners and track the grant timelines, deliverables, and ongoing reporting. In addition, the Consultant will meet regularly to collaborate, coordinate parallel projects, and share learnings throughout. The Consultant will support with grant management and reporting throughout the grant period.

Task 5 Subtask B Developing project case study
The Consultant will work with the Project Team collaboratively to write a case study and share reflections that may be of interest to others confronting similar challenges statewide.

Task 5, Subtask B Deliverables:
• Contributions to case study published
Task 5, Subtask C Project Evaluation
Evaluation will be integrated throughout the course of the project and will be used as a tool to adjust and refine activities as the project progresses. Additionally, the Consultant and the Project team will draft a final evaluation report at the end of the project.

Task 5, Subtask C Deliverables:
• Contributions to final evaluation report developed
Part 2 Budget
Cost
Description
Cost per
unit
Number
of Units Total Task 1 Task 2 Task 3 Task 4 Task 5
7 MCM -
Executive
Director
$ 38.37 40 $ 1,535 $ 384 $ 384 $ 384 $ 384
MCMDirector of
Programs
$ 46.63 50 $ 2,332 $ 583 $ 583 $ 1,166
MCM -
Community
Resilience
Manager
$ 35.35 200 $ 7070 $ 1,768 $ 3,535 $ 1,768
MCMCommunity
Civic
Engagement
$ 28.00 100 $ 2,800 $ 700 $ 700 $ 1,400
MCM- Policy
Coordinator $ 30.00 600 $ 18,000 $ 6,000 $ 6,600 $ 3,000 $2,400 MCMMarketing
Coordinator
$ 35.00 94.5 $ 3,308 $ 875 $ 1,750 $ 525 $158
Community
Meeting
Costs
$ 1080 6 $7,480 $ 3240 $ 3240 $ 1000
Translation
and printing
costs
$0 6 $1,500 $500 $500 $500
MCM - staff
costs (tax
and benefits
at 28%)
$ 9,812 $ 2,887 $ 3,794 $ 2,308 $ 824
MCM -
indirect costs
(20%)
$ 8,971 $ 2,639 $ 3,469 $ 2,110 $ 753
Totals $ 62,807 $ 0 $ 19,575 $ 24,555 $ 14,160 $ 4,518
____________________________________________________________________________________

FOR CITY CLERK ONLY
Council Meeting:

Disposition:

Agenda Item No: 4.e
Meeting Date: April 21, 2025

SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Department: Public Works
Prepared by: Mariana Sanchez, Junior Engineer
April Miller, Public Works Director
City Manager Approval: __________
TOPIC: METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (MTC) REGIONAL MEASURE 3: SAFE ROUTES TO TRANSIT AND BAY TRAIL PROGRAM RESOLUTION OF

LOCAL SUPPORT
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION OF LOCAL SUPPORT AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF AN

APPLICATION FOR FUNDING ASSIGNED TO MTC AND COMMITTING ANY

NECESSARY MATCHING FUNDS AND STATING THE ASSURANCE TO COMPLETE

THE CANAL NEIGHBORHOOD BELLAM GATEWAY LOCAL ACCESS IMPROVEMENT

PROJECT
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution of local support authorizing the execution of the grant application, committing any necessary matching funds, and giving assurance to implement the Canal Neighborhood Bellam Gateway Local Access Improvement Project as described in the Project’s Regional Measure 3 grant application.

BACKGROUND:

The Canal Neighborhood Bellam Gateway Local Access Improvement Project (“Project”) would implement a fully separated shared-use path for pedestrians and bicyclists along Bellam Boulevard from Playa Del Rey to Kerner Drive, and along Bellam Boulevard from the I-580 SB offramp to Andersen Drive, continuing south on Andersen to Jacoby Street, and connecting to the North-South Greenway and the Larkspur Ferry Terminal, Downtown San Rafael, and destinations further beyond. This segment of Bellam Boulevard is also on the Bay Trail alignment, and as the Project meets Bay Trail Design Guidelines, the facility will itself serve as a high-quality recreational segment linking to the scenic trails along the San Rafael Bay and on the North-South Greenway. The Project builds off prior sidewalk widening along Bellam Boulevard between I-580 and Kerner Boulevard, completed through a successful partnership between the Transportation Authority of Marin (TAM) and the City of San Rafael.

Regional Measure 3 (RM3) provides $150 million in funding for a competitive grant program to fund bicycle and pedestrian access improvements on and in the vicinity of the state-owned toll bridges connecting to rail transit stations and ferry terminals. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) is responsible for administering a competitive grant program for the RM3 funds. In February 2025, MTC staff recommended the Project for funding as part of the RM3 Safe Routes to Transit & Bay Trail SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 2
(SR2TBT) Cycle 1 program, which programs $75 million in new funding for fiscal years 2024-25 through 2027-28.

ANALYSIS:

The Project was selected for funding recommendation by a review committee out of 50 other applications in the RM3: SR2TBT program. The Project was reviewed by MTC Staff and was forwarded to the Programming and Allocations Committee meeting on February 12, 2025. Final consideration by the full MTC Commission occurred on February 26, 2025, with the adoption of MTC Resolution No. 4639. A requirement ahead of the allocation of funds for the Project is that the City must adopt a Resolution of Local Support in a template format approved by MTC. The Resolution of Local Support authorizes the execution of the grant application, commits required matching funds, and gives assurance that the Project will be implemented as described in the Project RM3 application.

COMMUNITY OUTREACH:

The Project has conducted extensive outreach as part of the US 101/I-580 Multi-Modal and Local Access Improvement Program. On November 8, 2023, the Voces de Canal Leadership Group convened the final meeting of the eight-week transportation curriculum. The course was sponsored by the Transportation Authority of Marin (TAM) and was designed to engage and educate a group of Spanish-speaking leaders from the Canal Neighborhood. The meeting gave TAM and the City of San Rafael an opportunity to hear from the community members about the transportation issues they identified throughout the course and several field trips along the Bellam Boulevard corridor.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

In October 2024, the City filed a notice of exemption (NOE) with the County of Marin for the Canal Neighborhood Bellam Gateway Local Access Improvement Project for categorical exemption based on existing facilities (CEQA Guidelines § 15301). The NOE included in Attachment 2.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Adoption of the Resolution of Local Support is required for the Regional Measure 3 (RM3) Safe Routes to Transit and Bay Trail Program (SR2TBT) application. The City is currently positioned to receive $6,840,000 to fund the Canal Neighborhood Bellam Gateway Local Access Improvement Project. Total project costs are estimated at $8,560,000; Transportation Authority of Marin (TAM) and the City of San Rafael have collectively committed to funding $1,720,000 of this cost.

OPTIONS:

The City Council has the following options to consider regarding this matter:

1. Adopt the resolution of local support authorizing the filing of an application for funding assigned to MTC and committing any necessary matching funds and stating the assurance to complete the Canal Neighborhood Bellam Gateway Local Access Improvement Project.

2. Do not adopt the resolution of local support as described.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution of local support authorizing the execution of the grant application, committing any necessary matching funds, and giving assurance to implement the Canal Neighborhood Bellam Gateway Local Access Improvement Project as described in the Project RM3 application.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution of Local Support Canal Neighborhood Bellam Gateway Local Access Improvement Project

2. Notice of Exemption
RESOLUTION NO.

RESOLUTION OF LOCAL SUPPORT AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF AN

APPLICATION FOR FUNDING ASSIGNED TO MTC AND COMMITTING ANY

NECESSARY MATCHING FUNDS AND STATING THE ASSURANCE TO

COMPLETE THE CANAL NEIGHBORHOOD BELLAM GATEWAY LOCAL ACCESS

IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, the City of San Rafael (herein referred to as APPLICANT) is submitting an application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) for $6,840,000 in funding assigned to MTC for programming discretion, which includes federal funding administered by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and federal or state funding administered by the California Transportation Commission (CTC) such as Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STP) funding, Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) funding, Carbon Reduction Program (CRP) funding, Transportation Alternatives (TA) set-aside/Active Transportation Program (ATP) funding, and Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) funding (herein collectively referred to as REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING) for the Canal Neighborhood Bellam Gateway Local Access Improvement Project (herein referred to as PROJECT) for the Regional Measure 3: Safe Routes to Transit and Bay Trail (RM3: SR2TBT) (herein referred to as PROGRAM); and
WHEREAS, the United States Congress from time to time enacts and amends legislation to provide funding for various transportation needs and programs, (collectively, the FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION ACT) including, but not limited to the Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STP) (23 U.S.C. § 133), the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) (23 U.S.C. § 149), the Carbon Reduction Program (CRP) (23 U.S.C. § 175), and the Transportation Alternatives (TA) set-aside (23 U.S.C. § 133); and
WHEREAS, state statutes, including California Streets and Highways Code §182.6, §182.7, and §2381(a)(1), and California Government Code §14527, provide various funding programs for the programming discretion of the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) and the Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA); and WHEREAS, pursuant to the FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION ACT, and any regulations promulgated thereunder, eligible project sponsors wishing to receive federal or state funds for a regionally-significant project shall submit an application first with the appropriate MPO, or RTPA, as applicable, for review and inclusion in the federal Transportation Improvement Program (TIP); and
WHEREAS, MTC is the MPO and RTPA for the nine counties of the San Francisco Bay region; and
WHEREAS, MTC has adopted a Regional Project Funding Delivery Policy (MTC Resolution No. 3606, revised) that sets out procedures governing the application and use of REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING; and
WHEREAS, APPLICANT is an eligible sponsor for REGIONAL
DISCRETIONARY FUNDING; and
WHEREAS, as part of the application for REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING, MTC requires a resolution adopted by the responsible implementing agency stating the following:
• the commitment of any required matching funds; and
• that the sponsor understands that the REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING is fixed at the programmed amount, and therefore any cost increase cannot be expected to be funded with additional REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING; and
• that the PROJECT will comply with the procedures, delivery milestones and funding deadlines specified in the Regional Project Funding Delivery Policy (MTC Resolution No. 3606, revised); and
• the assurance of the sponsor to complete the PROJECT as described in the application, subject to environmental clearance, and if approved, as included in MTC's federal Transportation Improvement Program (TIP); and • that the PROJECT will have adequate staffing resources to deliver and complete the PROJECT within the schedule submitted with the project application; and
• that the PROJECT will comply with all project-specific requirements as set forth in the PROGRAM; and
• that APPLICANT has assigned, and will maintain a single point of contact for all FHWA- and CTC-funded transportation projects to coordinate within the agency and with the respective County Transportation Agency (CTA), MTC, Caltrans, FHWA, and CTC on all communications, inquires or issues that may arise during the federal programming and delivery process for all FHWA- and CTC-funded transportation and transit projects implemented by APPLICANT; and
• in the case of an RTIP project, state law requires PROJECT be included in a local congestion management plan, or be consistent with the capital improvement program adopted pursuant to MTC’s funding agreement with the County Transportation Agency (CTA); and
WHEREAS, that APPLICANT is authorized to submit an application for REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING for the PROJECT; and
WHEREAS, there is no legal impediment to APPLICANT making applications for the funds; and
WHEREAS, there is no pending or threatened litigation that might in any way adversely affect the proposed PROJECT, or the ability of APPLICANT to deliver such PROJECT; and
WHEREAS, APPLICANT authorizes its Executive Director, General Manager, or designee to execute and file an application with MTC for REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING for the PROJECT as referenced in this resolution; and WHEREAS, MTC requires that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the MTC in conjunction with the filing of the application.

NOW, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL RESOLVES as follows:

RESOLVED that the APPLICANT is authorized to execute and file an application for funding for the PROJECT for REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING under the FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION ACT or continued funding; and be it further RESOLVED that APPLICANT will provide any required matching funds; and be it further
RESOLVED that APPLICANT understands that the REGIONAL
DISCRETIONARY FUNDING for the project is fixed at the MTC approved programmed amount, and that any cost increases must be funded by the APPLICANT from other funds, and that APPLICANT does not expect any cost increases to be funded with additional REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING; and be it further RESOLVED that APPLICANT understands the funding deadlines associated with these funds and will comply with the provisions and requirements of the Regional Project Funding Delivery Policy (MTC Resolution No. 3606, revised) and APPLICANT has, and will retain the expertise, knowledge and resources necessary to deliver federally-funded transportation and transit projects, and has assigned, and will maintain a single point of contact for all FHWA- and CTC-funded transportation projects to coordinate within the agency and with the respective County Transportation Agency (CTA), MTC, Caltrans, FHWA, and CTC on all communications, inquires or issues that may arise during the federal programming and delivery process for all FHWA- and CTCfunded transportation and transit projects implemented by APPLICANT; and be it further RESOLVED that PROJECT will be implemented as described in the complete application and in this resolution, subject to environmental clearance, and, if approved, for the amount approved by MTC and programmed in the federal TIP; and be it further RESOLVED that APPLICANT has reviewed the PROJECT and has adequate staffing resources to deliver and complete the PROJECT within the schedule submitted with the project application; and be it further
RESOLVED that PROJECT will comply with the requirements as set forth in MTC programming guidelines and project selection procedures for the PROGRAM; and be it further
RESOLVED that, in the case of a transit project, APPLICANT agrees to comply with the requirements of MTC’s Transit Coordination Implementation Plan as set forth in MTC Resolution No. 3866, revised; and be it further
RESOLVED that, in the case of a highway project, APPLICANT agrees to comply with the requirements of MTC’s Traffic Operations System (TOS) Policy as set forth in MTC Resolution No. 4104; and be it further
RESOLVED that, in the case of an RTIP project, PROJECT is included in a local congestion management plan, or is consistent with the capital improvement program adopted pursuant to MTC’s funding agreement with the County Transportation Agency (CTA); and be it further
RESOLVED that APPLICANT is an eligible sponsor of REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING funded projects; and be it further RESOLVED that APPLICANT is authorized to submit an application for REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING for the PROJECT; and be it further RESOLVED that there is no legal impediment to APPLICANT making applications for the funds; and be it further
RESOLVED that there is no pending or threatened litigation that might in any way adversely affect the proposed PROJECT, or the ability of APPLICANT to deliver such PROJECT; and be it further
RESOLVED that APPLICANT authorizes its Executive Director, General Manager, City Manager, or designee to execute and file an application with MTC for REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING for the PROJECT as referenced in this resolution; and be it further
RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution will be transmitted to the MTC in conjunction with the filing of the application; and be it further RESOLVED that the MTC is requested to support the application for the PROJECT described in the resolution, and if approved, to include the PROJECT in MTC's federal TIP upon submittal by the project sponsor for TIP programming.

I, LINDSAY LARA, Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on Monday the 21st day of April 2025, by the following vote, to wit:

AYES: Councilmembers:

NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:

Lindsay Lara, City Clerk
Notice of Exemption
To: Office of Planning and Research
P.O. Box 3044, Room 113
Sacramento, CA 95812-3044
From: (Public Agency): City of San Rafa13,I
111 Morphew Street
San Rafael, CA 94901
Appendix E
County Clerk
County of: _M_a_r_in ______ _
3501 Civic Center Drive, Room 234
(Address) {r O [ ~ [Q)
San Rafael, CA 94903 OCT 11 2024
S Ii ... OTT
Project Title: Canal Neighborhood Bellam Gateway Local Access Improvement Project Project Applicant: City of San Rafael Department of Public Works Project Location - Specific:

Bellam Boulevard, Andersen Drive, Jacoby Street
Project Location - City: San Rafael, CA Project Location - County:

Description of Nature, Purpose and Beneficiaries of Project:

Marin
This is a public project with the City of San Rafael acting as the applicant and Lead Agency. The work consists of construction of a shared pedestrian and bicycle pathway along Bellam Boulevard between Playa Del Rey and Kerner Boulevard, along Bellam Boulevard between 1-580 and Andersen Drive, along Andersen Drive from Bellam Boulevard to Jacoby Street, and along Jacoby Street, connecting to the SMART pathway, also known as the North-South Greenway. This initiative aims to provide pedestrian and bicycle facility connection between the Canal neighborhood and other destinations in San Rafael and beyond. All work will take place in the City of San Rafael.

Name of Public Agency Approving Project: City of San Rafael Department of Public Works Name of Person or Agency Carrying Out Project: City of San Rafael Department of Public Works Exempt Status: (check one):
□ Ministerial (Sec. 21080(b)(1 ); 15268);
□ Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080(b)(3); 15269(a));
D Emergency Project (Sec. 21080(b)(4); 15269(b)(c));
~ Categorical Exemption. State type and section number: Section 15301 (c), Existing Facilities ,.;
□ Statutory Exemptions. State code number: ____________________ _ Reasons why project is exempt:

This project will add shared pedestrian and bicycle facilities within the existing right-of-way of roadways in San Rafael. These facilities are in accordance with the description of the Existing Facilities Categorical Exemption (Sec. 15301 (c)), which includes "existing highways and streets, sidewalks, gutters, bicycle and pedestrian trails, and similar facilities ... and other alterations such as the addition of bicycle facilities ... and other similar alterations that do not create additional automobile lanes." This project does not involve expansion of the City's roadway network.

Lead Agency . . . . Contact Person: April Miller, Public Works Director Area Code/Telephone/Extension: 415-485-3409 If filed by applicant:

1. Attach certified document of exemption finding.

2. Has a Notice of Exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? Yes No Signature: l}.,{,Uvtoriy 5. Date: 1 0/11 /2024
■ Signed by Lead Agency Signed by Applicant
Authority cited: Sections 21083 and 21110, Public Resources Code.

Reference: Sections 21108, 21152, and 21152.1, Public Resources Code.

Title: Junior Engineer
Date Received for filing at QPR: _ ___ _ _
POSTED to u{~ TOJU\l) 10 1.-L
Revised 20 I I
CLERK
, Deputy
____________________________________________________________________________

FOR CITY CLERK ONLY
Council Meeting:

Disposition:

Agenda Item No: 4.f
Meeting Date: April 21, 2025

SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Department: Public Works
Prepared by: Adeel Shaikh, Junior Engineer
April Miller, Public Works Director
City Manager Approval: __________
TOPIC: B STREET CULVERT REPLACEMENT PROJECT
SUBJECT: ACCEPT COMPLETION OF THE B STREET CULVERT REPLACEMENT PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 11380, AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY CLERK TO FILE THE

NOTICE OF COMPLETION
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council accept the completion of the B Street Culvert Replacement Project and authorize the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion.

BACKGROUND:

The B Street Culvert Replacement Project replaced a portion of the existing concrete box culvert located underneath B Street near the intersection of Woodland Avenue. The reinforced concrete box culvert conveys storm runoff from the Gerstle Park neighborhood and outlets into the San Rafael Creek.

Approximately 100 feet of the box culvert was removed and replaced with a new culvert section that was partially cast-in-place and partially precast.

On April 15, 2024, the City Council awarded the construction contract to Maggiora & Ghilotti, Inc. in the amount of $414,770 and approved a construction contingency of $65,230 for a total of $480,000.

Construction began on July 22, 2024, and was completed on November 5, 2024.

ANALYSIS:

Under Civil Code Section 3093, the City must record a Notice of Completion upon City acceptance of the improvements. This acceptance initiates a period during which project subcontractors may file Stop Notices seeking payment from the City for the funds owed to the Contractor for the project work.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The Gas Tax Fund (#206) funded the B Street Culvert Replacement Project. The total cost for completion of this project is approximately $620,000, which includes about $65,000 for design and permitting and about $555,000 for construction and construction support.

SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 2
In accordance with project specifications, the City retained five percent of the full amount due on each progress payment to Maggiora & Ghilotti, Inc., resulting in a total construction retention of $23,650.08.

The final payment and release of retention will be made 35 days after recording the Notice of Completion.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Staff recommends that the City Council accept the completion of the B Street Culvert Replacement Project and authorize the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Notice of Completion
B Street Culvert Replacement Project 2022 Form NOTICE OF COMPLETION Project #11380 Page 1
Recording Requested By:

The City of San Rafael
When Recorded Mail To:

Lindsay Lara, City Clerk
1400 Fifth Avenue
San Rafael, CA 94901

EXEMPT FROM RECORDING FEES PER
GOVERNMENT CODE §27383
SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE IS FOR RECORDER’S USE

NOTICE OF COMPLETION
Civil Code §§ 8182, 8184, 9204, and 9208
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT:

1. The undersigned is the agent of the owner of the Project described below.

2. Owner’s full name is the City of San Rafael (“City”)

3. City’s address is 1400 Fifth Ave, San Rafael, CA 94901

4. The nature of City’s interest in the Project is:
__ Fee Ownership __ Lessee X Other: Public Right of Way Easement

5. Construction work on the Project performed on City’s behalf is generally described as follows: Replacement of a portion of the existing concrete box culvert located underneath B Street near the intersection of Woodland Avenue.

6. The name of the original Contractor for the Project is: Maggiora & Ghilotti, Inc. located at 555 Du Bois Street, San Rafael, CA 94901

7. The Project was accepted as complete on: November 20, 2024

8. The Project is located at: 496 B Street, San Rafael, CA 94901 Verification: In signing this document, I, the undersigned, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that I have read this notice, and I know and understand the contents of this notice, and that the facts stated in this notice are true and correct. __________________________ ________________________________ Date and Place Signature
April Miller, Director of Public Works
Name and Title

EXEMPT FROM NOTARY ACKNOWLEDGMENT REQUIREMENTS PER
GOVERNMENT CODE § 27287 AND CIVIL CODE § 9208
____________________________________________________________________________________

FOR CITY CLERK ONLY
Council Meeting: _______________________
Disposition: ___________________________
Agenda Item No: 5.a
Meeting Date: April 21, 2025

SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Department: Community and Economic Development
Prepared by: Renee Nickenig, Associate Planner
Margaret Kavanaugh-Lynch, Planning Manager
City Manager Approval: ______________
TOPIC: APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S APPROVAL

OF A REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION REQUEST
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL DENYING THE APPEAL OF AND UPHOLDING

THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF A REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION REQUEST AT 131 VALLEY VIEW AVENUE; APN 015-073-10
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council adopt the resolution to deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission’s approval of a reasonable accommodation request at 131 Valley View Avenue.

BACKGROUND:

October 17, 2024, the Community and Economic Development Director (Director) approved a reasonable accommodation request pursuant to San Rafael Municipal Code (SRMC) Section 14.26.060, approving proposed renovations to a single-family home with deviations from the otherwise applicable provisions of the City’s zoning code. The Director determined, using the criteria specified in SRMC Section 14.26.060, that approving the reasonable accommodation request was necessary to provide the Applicant (Applicant), an individual with a disability, equal access to housing, as required by state and federal law.

On October 21, 2024, the City of San Rafael received a timely appeal of the October 17, 2025, approval of the reasonable accommodation request. The appeal challenged staff’s determination that the reasonable accommodation provides equal access to housing under the Federal Fair Housing Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act and disagrees that the factors listed in SRMC Chapter

14.26.060 support granting reasonable accommodation request.

On January 13, 2025, the Applicant submitted an amended project plan (Project) that corrected errors in the October 17, 2024, plans.

On January 21 and 22, 2025, the Appellant submitted correspondence expanding on the reasons for the appeal in the Staff Report to the Planning Commission Attachment G (Attachment 4). The appeal was SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 2
summarized in four claims: (1) that there is no nexus between the disability and the requested accommodation; (2) that the City failed to investigate potential alternative designs; (3) that the fire hazard risk posed by the reasonable accommodation is too high; and (4) that the Appellants have been denied due process.

On February 25, 2025, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing in which the Commission considered (1) the report by staff describing the existing administrative approval and findings, (2) the amended plans submitted on January 13, 2025, (3) the modified findings regarding the amended plans, and (4) the staff report containing a response to the appeal, prepared in consultation with the City Attorney’s office. The Commission heard testimony of the Appellant, Applicant, and members of the public. The Commission asked questions of staff and the Applicant and discussed the staff report. Following deliberation, the Commission unanimously voted to accept staff’s recommendation to deny the appeal in part and approve the appeal in part, modifying the Director’s approval of the reasonable accommodation request to include the amended project submitted on January 13, 2025. The effect of the Commission’s action was to allow the construction of the renovations described in the January 13, 2025 plans by approving the reasonable accommodation request. (Resolution of the San Rafael Planning Commission Denying the Appeal of and Upholding the Administrative Approval of a Reasonable Accommodation Request at 131 Valley View Avenue, Attachment 2). The Project is described in pages 3-5 of the Staff Report to the Planning Commission (Attachment 4 to this report). The full project plan set is included as Attachment 5 to this report.

ANALYSIS:

On February 27, 2025, the City of San Rafael received a timely appeal to the City Council of the Planning Commission’s decision (Attachment 3). The appeal letter states:

We write to appeal the Planning Commission’s February 25 resolution that accepts all of the staff report’s recommendation and denies our appeal of the reasonable accommodation request by 131 Valley View Avenue’s owners.

We continue contest the City of San Rafael’s’ determination that the reasonable accommodation request is necessary to provide equal access to housing under the Federal Fair Housing Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act and disagree that the factors set forth in San Rafael Municipal Code Section 14.26.060 support grating the reasonable accommodation request.

The appeal refers to the previous testimony the Appellant provided for the Planning Commission Hearing.

The Appellant makes four claims: (1) that there is no nexus between the disability and the requested accommodation; (2) that the City failed to investigate potential alternative designs; (3) that the fire hazard risk posed by the reasonable accommodation is too high; and (4) that the Appellants have been denied due process. Please refer to pages 11 through 15 of the staff report to the Planning Commission (Attachment 4 for staff’s response) to these claims, prepared in consultation with the City Attorney’s office.

Findings of Approval
Pursuant to SRMC Section 14.26.020.B, the approval of the request for reasonable accommodation supplants the requirement for all other discretionary land use permits. The City Council should review pages 2-4 of the draft resolution (Attachment 1). The draft resolution (Attachment 1) includes all of the findings of approval, specifically on pages 2-4. One of the findings is particularly noteworthy that if the reasonable accommodation request is not granted, the applicant will be forced to relocate to other SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 3
housing. The Applicant has demonstrated that the proposed modifications are necessary to make 131 Valley View available to himself so that he can continue to comfortably reside at the property.

The City Council, based on their own independent judgment, should determine if they are able to support the findings contained therein.

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) REVIEW:

The Project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines 15061(b)(3) and Section 15303 of the CEQA Guidelines (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) as the activity in question will not have a significant effect on the environment.

COMMUNITY OUTREACH:

The project has been duly noticed in accordance with SRMC Chapter 14.29.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact associated with this staff report.

OPTIONS:

The City Council has the following options to consider in this matter:

1. Adopt the resolution denying the appeal of and upholding the Planning Commission’s approval of a reasonable accommodation request at 131 Valley View Avenue.

2. Grant the appeal, overturn the Planning Commission’s approval of the reasonable accommodation request, and direct staff to return with a revised resolution of denial.

3. Continue the appeal to allow the Appellant and the Applicant to address any of the City Council’s comments or concerns.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Staff recommends the City Council adopt the resolution to deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission’s approval of a reasonable accommodation request at 131 Valley View Avenue.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Draft Resolution of the City Council Denying the Appeal of and Upholding the Planning Commission Approval of a Reasonable Accommodation Request at 131 Valley View Avenue.

2. Resolution of the San Rafael Planning Commission Denying the Appeal of and Upholding the Administrative Approval of a Reasonable Accommodation Request at 131 Valley View Avenue.

3. Appellant Letter to City Council, dated and received February 27, 2025

4. Staff Report to the Planning Commission with associated attachments.

5. Project Plans, Approved by Planning Commission February 25, 2025

6. Correspondence
RESOLUTION NO.

RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL DENYING THE APPEAL OF

AND UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF A REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION REQUEST AT 131 VALLEY VIEW AVENUE
APN: 015-073-10
WHEREAS, on November 7, 2023 Habibolah Hastaie and Carol Underwood (Applicant) submitted a request for a reasonable accommodation to allow for the construction of specified additions to the existing residence at 131 Valley View Avenue; and
WHEREAS, staff determined that the San Rafael Municipal Code allows a reasonable accommodation request to supplant both a Major Environmental and Design Review permit and a Hillside Exception, such that approval of a reasonable accommodation request would be sufficient to allow for the requested additions; and WHEREAS, on October 17, 2024, the Community and Economic Development Director (“Director”) approved the reasonable accommodation request; and WHEREAS, on October 21, 2024, the City of San Rafael received a timely appeal of the administrative action approving the reasonable accommodation request; and
WHEREAS, on January 13, 2025 the Applicant submitted revised project plans; and
WHEREAS, on February 25, 2025 the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing during which the Commission considered (1) the report by staff describing the existing administrative approval and findings, (2) the amended plans submitted on January 13, 2025, (3) the modified findings regarding the amended plans, (4) the staff report containing a response to the appeal, prepared in consultation with the City Attorney’s office, (5) testimony of the Appellant, Applicant, and members of the public; and asked questions of staff and the Applicant; and WHEREAS, on February 25, 2025, following deliberation, the Planning Commission denied the Appeal in part and approved the Appeal in part, modifying the Director’s approval of the Reasonable Accommodation Request RA24-001 for the proposed additions to the residence at 131 Valley View Avenue to include the revised project plans submitted on January 13, 2025; and
WHEREAS, on April 21, 2025, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing during which it considered the Appeal of the Planning Commission’s February 25, 2025, action; and
- 2 -
WHEREAS, the approval of the reasonable accommodation request to allow the construction of additions to the existing residence is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301(e)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines (additions to existing structures that will not result in an increase of more than 50 percent of the floor area of the structures before the addition, or 2,500 square feet, whichever is less) and Section 15303 of the CEQA Guidelines (new construction or conversion of small structures).

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council denies the Appeal and Upholds the Planning Commission Approval of the Reasonable Accommodation Request at 131 Valley View Avenue subject to the findings and conditions below.

Findings (RA24-001)
A. Reasonable Accommodation

1. Whether the housing, which is the subject of the request, will be used by an individual with a disability under the Federal Fair Housing Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (the Acts):

The Applicant has provided documentation demonstrating that the property owner, who lives in the home, is an individual with a disability as defined under the Acts.

2. Whether the request for reasonable accommodation is necessary to make specific housing available to an individual with a disability under the Acts:

The Applicant has demonstrated that the existing interior and layout of the of the residence is not suitable for long-term stay for the individual with a disability as defined under the Acts. If the reasonable accommodation request is not granted, the applicant will be forced to relocate to other housing. The Applicant has demonstrated that the proposed modifications are necessary to make 131 Valley View available to himself so that he can continue to comfortably reside at the property.

3. Whether there is an alternative accommodation which may provide an equivalent level of benefit:

The design of the proposed project would minimize the amount of construction work and expense required to provide the necessary accessibility upgrades:
- 3 -
• Covering the front porch would create a safe transition from the front of the property to the existing entrance.
• Locating the dining room expansion on the northeast portion of the property would avoid the need to regrade the land, as a graded area is already available for development on northeast portion of the property. • The expansion on the northwest portion of the property will allow for safer mobility within the existing bedroom.

All together, the proposed design would require only minimal modifications to the floor plan of the residence, whereas alternative designs would require major modifications to the home’s layout, at a high cost to the homeowner.

Alternative designs would provide little or no benefit to the owners of neighboring properties or to the City. There are no alternative accommodations which provide an equivalent level of benefit, taking into account both utility and cost.

4. Whether the requested accommodation would negatively impact surrounding uses or properties:

Concerns have been expressed that the project might negatively impact surrounding properties due to the proximity of the project to the main buildings located on adjacent properties.

While the project will encroach into the required building setback; it will not expand beyond the existing east elevation of the home towards the neighboring property at the northeast, and thereby does not worsen the separation between the two main buildings. Further, the project will not increase the height of the roofline and will not be visible from the public street.

5. Whether the requested reasonable accommodation would impose an undue financial or administrative burden on the city:

The fee for the reasonable accommodation permit has been paid in full to account for staff time and noticing procedures per SRMC Section 14.26.050.

The City would not incur any additional financial or administrative burden.

Thus, the requested accommodation would not impose an undue financial or administrative burden on the City.

6. Whether the requested reasonable accommodation would require a fundamental alteration in the nature of a city program or law, including, but not limited to, land use and zoning:
- 4 -
A reasonable accommodation permit to provide equitable ADA access is permitted per SRMC Chapter 14.26 and is part of the nature of the City’s existing land use planning. Granting the request would not require a fundamental alternation in any City program.

Conditions of Approval (RA24-001)

1. Plans and Representations Become Conditions. All information and representations including the building techniques, materials, elevations and appearance of the project, as presented for approval on plans, dated January 13, 2025, and on file with the Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division, shall be the same as required for the issuance of a building permit, except as modified by these conditions of approval. Minor modifications or revisions to the project shall be subject to review and approval by Planning staff. Modifications deemed not minor by the Community and Economic Development Director may require review and approval as an amendment to the Request for a Reasonable Accommodation.

2. Possible Impact of timing of ADU on Project. The Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) shown on the plan set appears to structurally support the proposed addition on the northwest side of the project. If the ADU is not included in the plans submitted for building permit review, the Planning Division may require amended support of the project in a way that is generally consistent with the approved project plans.

3. Conditions Shall be Printed on Plans. The conditions of this permit shall be printed on the second sheet of each plan set submitted for a building permit pursuant to this permit, under the title ‘Request for Reasonable Accommodation Conditions’.

Additional sheets may also be used if the second sheet is not of sufficient size to list all of the conditions. The sheet(s) containing the conditions shall be of the same size as those sheets containing the construction drawings; 8-1/2” by 11” sheets are not acceptable.

4. Applicant Responsible for Compliance with Conditions. The applicant shall ensure compliance with all of the following conditions, including submittal to the project planner of required approval signatures at the times specified. Failure to comply with any condition may result in construction being stopped, issuance of a citation, and/or modification or revocation of this permit.

5. Subject to All Applicable Laws and Regulations. The approved use and/or construction is subject to, and shall comply with, all applicable City Ordinances and laws and regulations of other governmental agencies. Prior to construction, the applicant shall identify and secure all applicable permits from the Building Division, Department of Public Works, the Fire Department and other affected City divisions and departments.
- 5 -

6. Permit Validity. This Permit shall become effective on April 29, 2025 and shall be valid for a period of two (2) years from the date of final approval, or April 29, 2027, and shall become null and void if a building permit is not issued or a time extension granted by April 29, 2027. A permit for the construction of a building or structure is deemed exercised when a valid City building permit, if required, is issued, and construction has lawfully commenced.

7. Construction Hours: Consistent with the City of San Rafael Municipal Code Section

8.13.050.A, construction hours shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 9:00 a.m to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Construction shall not be permitted on Sundays or City-observed holidays. Construction activities shall include delivery of materials, hauling materials off-site; startup of construction equipment engines, arrival of construction workers, paying of radios and other noises caused by equipment and/or construction workers arriving at, or working on, the site.

8. Landscaping. Landscaping and irrigation must meet the Marin Municipal Water District's (MMWD) water conservation rules and regulations. All existing landscaping damaged during construction shall be replaced. All landscaping shall be maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, free of weeds and debris. Any dying or dead landscaping shall be replaced in a timely fashion. No part of the existing landscaping shall be removed, unless their removal has been reviewed and approved by the Planning Division.

9. Exterior Lighting. All exterior lighting shall be energy efficient where feasible; and shielded and directed downward and away from property lines to prevent excessive glare beyond the subject property (per SRMC Section 14.16.227).

I, LINDSAY LARA, Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of San Rafael, held on Monday, the 21st day of April 2025, by the following vote, to wit:

AYES: Councilmembers:

NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:
_________________
Lindsay Lara, City Clerk

February 27, 2025
Lisa Dal Gallo
Josh Sullivan
127 Valley View Ave.

San Rafael, CA 94901
City of San Rafael
City Council
1400 5th Ave., Suite 209
San Rafael, CA 94901
Dear City Council:

We write to appeal the Planning Commission's February 25 resolution that accepts all of the staff report's recommendation and denies our appeal of the reasonable accommodation request by 131 Valley View Avenue's owners.

We continue contest the City of San Rafael's' determination that the reasonable accommodation request is necessary to provide equal access to housing under the Federal Fair Housing Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act and disagree that the factors set forth in San Rafael Municipal Code Section 14.26.060 support grating the reasonable accommodation request.

Co sequently, we request the City Council hear our appeal at its next public meeting.

Josh
i,.JL<-
Sullivan
~
1 Community Development Department –
Planning Division
Meeting
Date:

February 25, 2025
Agenda Item: G.1
Case Number: PLAN24-174
(AP24-006)
Project
Planner: Renee Nickenig,
Associate Planner

REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBJECT: 131 Valley View Avenue – Appeal to the Planning Commission of the Community and Economic Development Director’s approval of a request for a reasonable accommodation to allow specified modifications to the existing residence at 131 Valley View Avenue.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On October 17, 2024 the Community and Economic Development Director (Director) approved a reasonable accommodation request pursuant to San Rafael Municipal Code (SRMC) Section

14.26.060 (Attachment C), approving proposed renovations to a single-family home with deviations from the otherwise applicable provisions of the City’s zoning code. The Director determined, using the criteria specified in SRMC Section 14.26.060, that approving the reasonable accommodation request was necessary to provide the applicant (Applicant), an individual with a disability, equal access to housing, as required by state and federal law. The project (Project) that was approved included:

1. Enclosing and expanding the front porch;

2. Adding a bay window at the front of the residence;

3. Enclosing an existing covered porch at the east of the residence;

4. Expanding the bedroom at the northwest (rear) of the residence; and

5. Expanding the existing dining room at the northeast (rear) of the residence with an attached open, uncovered deck.

An approved request for a reasonable accommodation supplants discretionary land use permits that might otherwise be necessary as a reasonable accommodation request allows for a “modification or exception” to “rules, standards and practices for the siting, development and use of housing or housing-related facilities” that would normally apply (SRMC Section 14.26.020.B).

On October 21, 2024, the City of San Rafael received a timely appeal of the October 17 approval of the reasonable accommodation request (Attachment D). The appeal challenges staff’s determination that the reasonable accommodation provides equal access to housing under the Federal Fair Housing Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act and disagrees that the factors listed in SRMC Chapter 14.26.060 support granting reasonable accommodation request.

SAN RAFAEL

THE CITY WITH A MISSION
2 Appeals of land use actions are governed by SRMC Chapter 14.28. Appeals based on decisions made by the Director are heard by the Planning Commission (SRMC Section 14.28.010.A).

During the hearing, the Planning Commission must review the record of the decision (including this Staff Report) and hear testimony of the appellant, the applicant, and any other interested party (SRMC Section 14.28.040[A]). Following the appeal hearing, the Planning Commission must affirm, modify, or reverse the original decision (SRMC Section 14.28.050).

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission:
(1) Convene a public hearing.
(2) Discuss the Staff report, testimony and ask questions of the Staff, Applicant, and Appellant as needed.
(3) Approve the Resolution attached as Exhibit A, Denying the Appeal in part and approve the Appeal in part, modifying the Director’s approval of the reasonable accommodation request to include the amended Project submitted on January 13, 2025 and the Findings found in Table A.1.

PROPERTY FACTS
Address/Location: 131 Valley View Avenue Parcel Number: 010-081-18 Property Size: 6,745 sf Neighborhood: Central San Rafael (Sun Valley / Fairhills)
Site Characteristics:

General Plan Designation Zoning District Existing Land-Use Project Site: Hillside Residential (HR) R20-H Single-Family Residential North: Public/Quasi-Public (P/QP) R20-H Marin Municipal Water District Facility
South: HR R20-H Single-Family Residential
East: HR R20-H Single-Family Residential
West: HR R20-H Single-Family Residential
Site Description/Setting:

The subject site is located on the north side of Valley View Avenue. The site is flat on the east side, with a significant slope at the west side. The site is developed with a single-family residence with an attached garage and established landscaping. The driveway is paved between the garage and Valley View Avenue, and there are two poured concrete pads at the north (rear) of the property.

I
3 Figure 1 Vicinity Map
The property is flanked by single-family residences on the east and west and abuts a Marin Municipal Water District site at the north. A visually significant ridgeline, as shown on the Community Design Map of the City’s General Plan, runs west to east to the immediate north of the property.

Project Description
The Project consists of the following modifications to the existing structure, depicted in Figure 2 below:

1. Enclosing and expanding the front porch;

2. Adding a bay window at the front of the residence;

3. Enclosing an existing covered porch at the east of the residence;

4. Expanding the bedroom at the northwest (rear) of the residence; and

5. Expanding the existing dining room at the northeast (rear) of the residence with an attached open, uncovered deck.
4 Figure 2 Proposed Main House Floor Plan
The main house floor plan (Figure 2) shows the proposed elements that are part of the Project highlighted in green, including: (1) front porch enclosure; (2) bay window addition; (3) east porch enclosure; (4) bedroom addition; and (5) dining room addition and (6) open exterior deck. 1 2
3 4 5
6 KEY
Project
;..
,m [l'J•oG +---0 1'- 1·
"«> <t'
st>
''"' B•IH ( Pflllil"1tY l!J
(£} klTCHO.
~ /41 /41 (£) Ur,, 7 ~ a· a· (E) HJ.LL (<:)Cl.
□
(f) HM...L
(E) B 00"' (E) 6 OOV,
Cl
, ... ,.
□ __r
1 - r
5 Figure 3 Proposed Project Site Plan
The proposed project site plan (Figure 3) shows the additions highlighted in Figure 2, as well as the addition of an attached Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU). The attached ADU is subject to ministerial review and not a part of the approved reasonable accommodation request. In total, the Project would add approximately 486 square feet of new enclosed space to the residence.

Compliance with Development Standards
As stated previously, the approval of the request for reasonable accommodation supplants the requirement for all other discretionary land use permits. However, staff notes that the Project as proposed complies with the following applicable development standards as required by SRMC Sections 14.04.030 and 14.12.030: the rear setback; maximum height; maximum lot coverage; maximum height; natural state; and gross building square-footage. The Project as proposed would not comply with the following applicable development standards as required by SRMC Sections 14.04.030 and 14.12.030, including: the side setback of the addition and enclosure at the northeast; the side setback of the addition at the northwest; the expansion of the front porch KEY
Project
Elements Not part of Project
lTITITI!l --
~ - • ;n--llOU
6 enclosure at the southeast (front); and as new development on an visually significant ridgeline.

If not for the approval of the reasonable accommodation request, this project would otherwise require a Major Environmental and Design Review and Hillside Exception, pursuant to SRMC Section 14.12.040.

Correction to Original Project Approval and Subsequent Plan Set Although not part of the Appeal, staff notes that in the October 17, 2024 approval document, staff notes three errors were made:

1. Finding Number Two (2) used she/her pronouns. That was not correct.

2. Finding Number Three (3) incorrectly located the dining room expansion at the northwest and the bedroom expansion at the southwest.

3. Finding Number Four (4) incorrectly stated that the original Project would not increase the height of the roofline and would not be visible from the public street. However, as shown on the associated plan set (Attachment C), the Project would increase the roof height and would be visible from the public street. Staff notes this increase would not exceed the permitted height limit for the zoning district and would not impact the decision to grant the request.

Following the receipt of the Appeal, the Applicant submitted an amended plan set, Attachment F. This plan set is consistent with the project proposed in the original plan set in all ways, but were revised to have no change to the existing overall heights of the residence.

As a part of this hearing, staff is proposing modifications to Findings Two (2) and Three (3) below to correct the remaining errors. Finding Four (4) is now correct.

DISCUSSION
City staff worked closely with staff from the City Attorney’s office when reviewing the Project and the reasonable accommodation request. Any decision to grant or deny a reasonable accommodation request “shall be consistent with the [Federal Fair Housing Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act] and shall be based on consideration of six factors enumerated in SRMC Section 14.26.060(A). The six factors are to be considered together and no single factor controls the decision. Not all of the factors must be satisfied in order for a request to be approved. Staff applied the six factors to the reasonable accommodation request for the proposed Project in table format, reproduced from the October 17, 2024 approval letter as Table A below. Staff found that five of the six factors favored granting the reasonable accommodation request. One factor - whether the requested accommodation has a negative impact on surrounding properties - weighed against granting the request, though staff noted that impacts were speculative. Considering the six factors on the whole, the City found that the reasonable accommodation request was consistent with the Federal Fair Housing Act and California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act and approved the reasonable accommodation request. 7 Table A: Original Entitlement: Requests for Reasonable Accommodation Findings (SRMC §14.26.060)
Yes No
(A)Findings. The written decision to grant or deny a request for reasonable accommodation shall be consistent with the Acts and shall be based on consideration of the following factors:

1. Whether the housing,
which is the subject of the
request, will be used by an
individual with a disability
under the Acts;
X The applicant has provided documentation
demonstrating that the property owner, who lives in
the home, is an individual with a disability as
defined under the Acts.

2. Whether the request for
reasonable
accommodation is
necessary to make specific
housing available to an
individual with a disability
under the Acts;
X The applicant has demonstrated that the existing
interior and layout of the of the residence is not
suitable for long-term stay for the individual with a
disability as defined under the Acts. If the reasonable accommodation permit is not granted, the applicant
will be forced to relocate to other housing. The
applicant has demonstrated that the proposed
modifications are necessary to make 131 Valley
View available to herself so that she can continue to
comfortably reside at the property.

3. Whether there is an
alternative accommodation
which may provide an
equivalent level of benefit;
X The design of the proposed project would minimize
the amount of construction work and expense
required to provide the necessary accessibility
upgrades:
• Covering the front porch would create a safe
transition from the front of the property to the
existing entrance.
• Locating the dining room expansion on the
northwest portion of the property would
avoid the need to regrade the land, as a
graded area is already available for
development on northwest portion of the
property.
• The expansion on the southwest portion of
the property will allow for safer mobility
within the existing bedroom.

All together, the proposed design would require only
minimal modifications to the floor plan of the
residence, whereas alternative designs would
8 require major modifications to the home’s layout, at
a high cost to the homeowner. There are no
alternative accommodations which provide an
equivalent level of benefit, taking into account both
utility and cost.

4. Whether the requested
accommodation would
negatively impact
surrounding uses or
properties;
X Concerns have been expressed that the project
might negatively impact surrounding properties due
to the proximity of the project to the main buildings
located on adjacent properties.

While the project will encroach into the required
building setback; it will not expand beyond the
existing east elevation of the home towards the
neighboring property at the northeast, and thereby
does not worsen the separation between the two
main buildings. Further, the project will not increase
the height of the roofline and will not be visible from the public street.

5. Whether the requested
reasonable
accommodation would
impose an undue financial
or administrative burden on
the city; and
X The fee for the reasonable accommodation permit
has been paid in full to account for staff time and
noticing procedures per SRMC Section 14.26.050.

The City would not incur any additional financial or
administrative burden. Thus, the requested
accommodation would not impose an undue
financial or administrative burden on the City.

6. Whether the requested
reasonable
accommodation would
require a fundamental
alteration in the nature of a
city program or law,
including, but not limited to,
land use and zoning.

X A reasonable accommodation permit to provide
equitable ADA access is permitted per SRMC
Chapter 14.26 and is part of the nature of the City’s
existing land use planning. Granting the request
would not require a fundamental alternation in any
City program.

Though staff determined using the fourth factor that there would be some impacts to surrounding properties, the analysis highlighted that such impacts would be minor: the Project will encroach into the required building side setback at the northwest and northeast, but will not expand beyond the existing west and east elevations of the residence. Likewise, the Project will not exceed the overall maximum height permitted at the property. Thus, on balance, staff concluded that since five of the six factors weighed in favor of granting the reasonable accommodation request, and that since the only factor that weighed against granting the request was only minor, that the reasonable accommodation request should be granted.
9 Table A.1: Revised Reasonable Accommodation Findings (SRMC §14.26.060) to correct errors noted in Staff Report
Yes No
(B)Findings. The written decision to grant or deny a request for reasonable accommodation shall be consistent with the Acts and shall be based on consideration of the following factors:

1. Whether the housing,
which is the subject of the
request, will be used by an
individual with a disability
under the Acts;
X The Applicant has provided documentation
demonstrating that the property owner, who lives in
the home, is an individual with a disability as
defined under the Acts.

2. Whether the request for
reasonable
accommodation is
necessary to make specific
housing available to an
individual with a disability
under the Acts;
X The Applicant has demonstrated that the existing
interior and layout of the of the residence is not
suitable for long-term stay for the individual with a
disability as defined under the Acts. If the
reasonable accommodation permit is not granted,
the applicant will be forced to relocate to other
housing. The Applicant has demonstrated that the
proposed modifications are necessary to make 131
Valley View available to himself so that he can
continue to comfortably reside at the property.

3. Whether there is an
alternative accommodation
which may provide an
equivalent level of benefit;
X The design of the proposed project would minimize
the amount of construction work and expense
required to provide the necessary accessibility
upgrades:
• Covering the front porch would create a safe
transition from the front of the property to the
existing entrance.
• Locating the dining room expansion on the
northeast portion of the property would avoid
the need to regrade the land, as a graded
area is already available for development on
northeast portion of the property.
• The expansion on the northwest portion of
the property will allow for safer mobility
within the existing bedroom.

All together, the proposed design would require
only minimal modifications to the floor plan of the
residence, whereas alternative designs would
require major modifications to the home’s layout, at
a high cost to the homeowner. There are no
10 alternative accommodations which provide an
equivalent level of benefit, taking into account both
utility and cost.

4. Whether the requested
accommodation would
negatively impact
surrounding uses or
properties;
X Concerns have been expressed that the project
might negatively impact surrounding properties due
to the proximity of the project to the main buildings
located on adjacent properties.

While the project will encroach into the required
building setback; it will not expand beyond the
existing east elevation of the home towards the
neighboring property at the northeast, and thereby
does not worsen the separation between the two
main buildings. Further, the project will not increase
the height of the roofline and will not be visible from the public street.

5. Whether the requested
reasonable
accommodation would
impose an undue financial
or administrative burden on
the city; and
X The fee for the reasonable accommodation permit
has been paid in full to account for staff time and
noticing procedures per SRMC Section 14.26.050.

The City would not incur any additional financial or
administrative burden. Thus, the requested
accommodation would not impose an undue
financial or administrative burden on the City.

6. Whether the requested
reasonable
accommodation would
require a fundamental
alteration in the nature of a
city program or law,
including, but not limited to,
land use and zoning.

X A reasonable accommodation permit to provide
equitable ADA access is permitted per SRMC
Chapter 14.26 and is part of the nature of the City’s
existing land use planning. Granting the request
would not require a fundamental alternation in any
City program.

Appeal
The appellants (“Appellants”), who live at 127 Valley View Avenue (to the west of 131 Valley View Avenue), disagree with the City’s determination that the reasonable accommodation request provides equal housing under the Federal Fair Housing Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act and disagrees with the City’s determination that the factors set forth in San Rafael Municipal Code Section 14.26.060 support granting the reasonable accommodation request. The appeal is included as Attachment D. The Appellants also submitted a letter to the City on January 21, 2025 (included as Attachment G), further explaining the reasons for their appeal.

The appeal can be summarized in four claims: (1) that there is no nexus between the disability and the requested accommodation; (2) that the City failed to investigate potential alternative designs; (3) that the fire hazard risk posed by the reasonable accommodation is too high; and (4) that the 11 Appellants have been denied due process. These points are outlined below in greater detail, along with a rebuttal prepared in consultation with staff from the City Attorney’s office:
1) Nexus
In approving the initial project, the City determined that there is a nexus between the disability of the Applicant for the reasonable accommodation and the requested accommodation. The Appellants state in the correspondence received that they “do not dispute one occupant of 131 Valley View is disabled as defined under California and federal law,” but also that “appellants have observed both owners function independently without mobility aids” during the past four years.

The City has determined through communications with the Applicant that one of the occupants of 131 Valley View is disabled as defined under California law and the ADA. Accordingly, the Applicant is eligible to apply for a reasonable accommodation under local, state, and federal law.

Appellants correctly point out the following features of disability law:

To prove a reasonable accommodation is necessary, proponents “must show that, but for the accommodation, they will likely be deprived of the opportunity to enjoy the housing of their choice." (United States v. California Mobile Home Park, 107 F.3d 1374, 1380-81 (9th Cir.1997).) This analysis is "highly fact-specific, requiring case-by-case determination." (United States v.

California Mobile Home Park Mgmt. Co., 29 F.3d 1413, 1418 (9th Cir.1994). There must be an identifiable relationship, or nexus between the requested accommodation and the individual’s disability. For example, in U.S. v. City of Chicago Heights, 161 F.Supp.2d 819 (N.D. Ill. 2001), the District Court describes the showing required to establish necessity as follows: "The concept of necessity requires at a minimum the showing that the desired accommodation will affirmatively enhance a disabled plaintiff’s quality of life by ameliorating the effects of the disability. Plaintiffs must show that but for the accommodation, they likely will be denied an equal opportunity to enjoy the housing of their choice." (Id. at 834 (internal quotes and citations omitted).) The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and the U.S. Department of Justice have also made clear that if an individual’s disability is known or obvious, and their requested accommodation or modification is clearly connected to their disability, the law prohibits requests for additional information regarding the disability.1 In such circumstances, the City cannot require that an individual disclose a particular diagnosis or provide medical records in connection with a request for a reasonable accommodation.2 Moreover, most disability-related information is confidential and cannot be shared with other persons – including Appellants or the public at large – absent a court1 Joint Statement of the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Justice regarding Reasonable Modifications under the Fair Housing Act, Attachment E, p. 5. 2 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, FAQs, “What can I require an individual with a disability to include in a request for a reasonable accommodation or reasonable modification if I am a housing provider?”, available at
https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/fair_housing_equal_opp/reasonable_accommodations_and_modific ations/faqs#verification-of-disability
12 issued subpoena requiring disclosure.3 In recognition of this fact, the California Public Records Act explicitly exempts such records from public disclosure.4 City staff, through detailed conversations with the Applicant, determined that the disability of one of the residents of 131 Valley View is directly related to the requested accommodation. City staff also determined that if the reasonable accommodation request were not granted, the disability would make living in the home untenable in its current state for the long term and therefore deprive the occupant of the opportunity to enjoy the housing of their choice. 2) Alternative Designs
The City considered alternative project designs and properly concluded that the proposed design is superior to alternatives. When processing reasonable accommodation requests, the San Rafael Municipal Code requires the City to analyze “whether there is an alternative accommodation which may provide an equivalent level of benefit.” (SRMC Ch. 14.26.060(A).) Since “equivalent level of benefit” is not defined, staff have (consistent with past practice) interpreted this term to include consideration of potential costs to an applicant for a reasonable accommodation request, potential costs to members of the public, and potential costs to the City. The notice approving the reasonable accommodation request balances these considerations by explaining the following:
“The design of the proposed project would minimize the amount of construction work and expense required to provide the necessary accessibility upgrades:
• Covering the front porch would create a safe transition from the front of the property to the existing entrance.
• Locating the dining room expansion on the northwest portion of the property would avoid the need to regrade the land, as a graded area is already available for development on northwest portion of the property.
• The expansion on the southwest portion of the property will allow for safer mobility within the existing bedroom.

All together, the proposed design would require only minimal modifications to the floor plan of the residence, whereas alternative designs would require major modifications to the home’s layout, at a high cost to the homeowner. There are no alternative accommodations which provide an equivalent level of benefit, taking into account both utility and cost.” Nothing in the Municipal Code or any other law requires an applicant for a reasonable accommodation request to submit, or the City to review, detailed plans depicting project alternatives; narrative analysis of alternatives is sufficient. Through extensive conversations with the Applicant, 3 Attachment E, p. 5.
4 Government Code § 7927.700 [the California Public Records Act “does not require disclosure of personnel, medical, or similar files, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.”]
13 City staff determined that there is no alternative accommodation which may provide an equivalent level of benefit, all things considered. The most significant constraining factors here are the current layout of the existing residence and the state of the existing backyard grading. Appellants take issue with the proposed expansion of the dining room from the northeast portion of the existing residence.

The existing dining room is located in the northeast portion of the existing residence, close enough to the kitchen to be useable and accessible to the Applicant, taking into account their disability. The backyard area adjacent to the existing dining room is already graded, and expansion onto that area would require no additional grading. Expanding the dining room as proposed would avoid the need to change the interior layout of the home or the need to grade any portion of the backyard. Locating the dining room expansion anywhere else on the property would certainly require significant redesign of the interior of the existing residence and could potentially require new grading in the backyard, both at a high monetary cost to the Applicant. While alternative designs could comply with the City’s design standards without the need for a reasonable accommodation request, such designs would provide little benefit to the City.

As explained below, neither the proposed design nor any alternative design poses any significant fire hazard, and the City is not aware of (and Appellants have not identified) any other factor related to the Project affecting neighbors or members of the public. The same considerations are true of the location of the bedroom expansion. Accordingly, the City justifiably concluded that no alternative accommodation would provide an equivalent level of benefit as the proposed design of the approved reasonable accommodation. The same considerations are true of the location of the bedroom expansion. If the Applicant were required to locate the dining room expansion or bedroom expansion elsewhere, the Applicant would either need to significantly reconfigure the interior of the house or regrade the backyard at a significantly higher monetary cost for an equivalent level of mobility benefit as the proposed design. Alternative designs with a similar monetary cost to the Applicant provide significantly less mobility benefits as the proposed design. Therefore, analyzing “equivalent level of benefit” from the applicant’s perspective, there is no alternative design that provides an equivalent level of benefit.

In terms of potential costs to members of the public, costs include potential loss of views due to increased height, potential loss of privacy due to increased proximity to neighbors, and potential increase in fire risk due to increased proximity to neighbors. The proposed design would not increase the height of the existing structure and would not impact any neighbor’s views; alternative designs could do no better. The proposed design does not increase the proximity of 131 Valley View to the neighbor to the west at 127 Valley View, so there would be no potential loss of privacy to those neighbors. The expanded dining room would increase the proximity of 131 Valley View to the neighbors to the east at 135 Valley View, but since the proximity would be to 135 Valley View’s garage rather than a bedroom or bathroom, the potential loss of privacy is minimal. Alternative designs would provide little or no additional privacy benefits. Finally, as explained below, the City has not identified any concrete fire risk related to the proposed design. While alternative designs could potentially be made ultra-fire safe, the proposed design meets the City’s fire safety standards and does not create significant fire risks for neighbors. Accordingly, the costs of the proposed design to members of the public is low, and alternative designs would not likely decrease these costs.

The only potential cost to the City is City’s interest in enforcing its normally applicable development standards. Alternative designs could potentially comply with the City’s standards without the need for a reasonable accommodation request; however, the City gains little or nothing from requiring strict compliance with the normally applicable development standards in this case. 14 Considering the potential costs to an applicant, potential costs to members of the public, and potential costs to the City, the City justifiably concluded that no alternative accommodation would provide an equivalent level of overall benefit as the proposed design of the approved reasonable accommodation.
3) Fire Hazard Risk
Appellants claim that the proposed design creates significant fire risks and that the City should have denied the reasonable accommodation request under California Code of Regulations Section 12179(b)(3), which states that a reasonable accommodation request can be denied if:

The requested accommodation would constitute a direct threat to the health or safety of others (i.e. a significant risk of bodily harm) or would cause substantial physical damage to the property of others, and such risks cannot be sufficiently mitigated or eliminated by another reasonable accommodation [. . .]
The requested reasonable accommodation does not create any fire hazard risk that warranted denying the request. Critically, 131 Valley View Avenue is not located in either a moderate, high, or very high fire hazard zone, as indicated by the most recent CAL FIRE maps.5 Moreover, even if 131 Valley View Avenue were located in one of these zones, the California Department of Housing and Community Development has specified that location in a fire hazard zone is not necessarily a reason to restrict residential development in such zone.6 Rather, CAL FIRE’s fire hazard maps are intended to govern building materials used in construction and defining zones of defensibility around structures, but not intended to restrict housing development.7 Any potential risk to neighboring properties can be mitigated through the use of fire-resistant building materials and by the creation of defensible space around structures. Because 131 Valley View is in the Wild Urban Interface, its owners are already required by law to maintain defensible space around structures on their property, and they will continue to be required to do so with respect to the construction of the Project approved by the reasonable accommodation request.

Appellants claim that the City should have denied the reasonable accommodation request under California Code of Regulations Section 12179(b)(3), which states that a reasonable accommodation request can be denied if:

The requested accommodation would constitute a direct threat to the health or safety of others (i.e. a significant risk of bodily harm) or would cause substantial physical damage to the property of others, and such risks cannot be sufficiently mitigated or eliminated by another reasonable accommodation [. . .]
Existing fire safety laws and building codes minimize the fire risks associated with the Project, so there is no basis under which the City could find make this finding. 5 Available at https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/03beab8511814e79a0e4eabf0d3e7247/; Attachment J.
6 See 2025 ADU Handbook, p. 44, available at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/sites/default/files/docs/policy-andresearch/adu-handbook-update.pdf. 7 Id. 15 4) Due Process
The City has properly complied with all applicable local, state, and federal laws in processing the reasonable accommodation request that is the subject of this appeal. For example, this Staff Report was published at least 72 hours before the Planning Commission hearing at which this matter is to be discussed, as required by state law. (Gov. Code § 54957.5.) Appellants’ belief that the City “should have issued any supplemental [report] long ago” is unfounded. Legislators and the courts have determined that 72 hours provides adequate time for members of the public, such as Appellants, to review staff reports before public hearings.

Ultimately, Staff stands by the analysis provided in Table A and included in the October 17 approval of the reasonable accommodation request. The previous analysis indicated that granting the reasonable accommodation request might negatively impact surrounding properties due to the proximity of the project to the main buildings located on adjacent properties. However, any such impacts would affect the owner of 135 Valley View Avenue (to the east of the proposed Project), not Appellants, who own 127 Valley View Avenue (to the west of the proposed Project). The most significant impact of granting the reasonable accommodation request would be due to the proximity between the expanded dining room at the northeast of the residence and the existing residence next door to the east, at 135 Valley View Avenue. Even with this addition, the Project would not expand beyond the existing east elevation of the existing residence towards the residence at 135 Valley View Avenue, and would not create any otherwise impermissibly small separation between the buildings at 131 and 135 Valley View Avenue. Further, the Project would not exceed the permitted overall height for the zoning district.

Lastly, Staff supports the new plans included as Attachment F and the revised Findings found in Table A.1 of this staff report as they reduce the height of the project and correct a typographical error, respectively. Therefore, approving this version of the project is the staff recommendation.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The approval of the reasonable accommodation request is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code §21000, et seq. and California Code of Regulations, §15000, et seq.) pursuant to Section 15301(e)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines (additions to existing structures that will not result in an increase of more than 50 percent of the floor area of the structures before the addition, or 2,500 square feet, whichever is less) and Section 15303 of the CEQA Guidelines (new construction or conversion of small structures). Furthermore, none of the exceptions found in Government Code §15300.2 apply.

CORRESPONDENCE
Prior to publication of this report, staff has received correspondence from the Appellant, the Applicant, and an additional neighbor. Opposition to the project includes concerns of the project’s impact to surrounding properties, including concern for fire safety. Additional information was provided by the applicant in further support of the project. 16 Correspondences received are attached to this report in the following order:

Attachment G. Statement and exhibits from Appellant received January 21 and 22, 2025.

Attachment H. Comment from neighbor received January 20, 2025; and follow-up items received January 22, 2025 and February 3, 2025.

Attachment I. Statement and exhibits from Applicant received February 17, 2025.

OPTIONS
The Planning Commission has the following options:

1. Deny the Appeal in part and approve the Appeal in part, modifying the Director’s approval of the reasonable accommodation request to include the amended Project submitted on January 13, 2025 (Attachment F) and the Findings found in Table A.1.

2. Deny the Appeal and uphold the Director’s approval of the reasonable accommodation request in its original form.

3. Grant the Appeal, overturn the Director’s approval of the reasonable accommodation request, and direct staff to return with a revised Resolution of denial.

4. Continue the appeal to allow the appellant and the applicant to address any of the Commission’s comments or concerns.

ATTACHMENTS
A. Draft Resolution
B. Draft Conditions
C. Administrative Approval of Reasonable Accommodation Request, dated October 17, 2024 D. Appellant Letter, dated and received October 21, 2024 E. Joint Statement of the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Justice regarding Reasonable Modifications under the Fair Housing Act F. Project Plan Set, received January 13, 2025
G. Statement and exhibits from Appellant received January 21 and 22, 2025 H. Comment from neighbor received January 20, 2025; and follow-up items received January 22, 2025 and February 3, 2025
I. Statement and exhibits from Applicant received February 17, 2025 J. CAL FIRE Hazard Map for 131 Valley View Avenue as of February 14, 2025 RESOLUTION NO. 10-

RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL PLANNING COMMISSION DENYING THE

APPEAL OF AND UPHOLDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL OF A REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION REQUEST AT 131 VALLEY VIEW AVENUE APN: 015-073-10
WHEREAS, on November 7, 2023 Habibolah Hastaie and Carol Underwood (Applicant) submitted a request for a reasonable accommodation to allow for the construction of specified additions to the existing residence at 131 Valley View Avenue; and
WHEREAS, staff determined that the San Rafael Municipal Code allows a reasonable accommodation request to supplant both a Major Environmental and Design Review permit and a Hillside Exception, such that approval of a reasonable accommodation request would be sufficient to allow for he requested additions; and WHEREAS, the approval of the reasonable accommodation request to allow the construction of additions to the existing residence is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301(e)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines (additions to existing structures that will not result in an increase of more than 50 percent of the floor area of the structures before the addition, or 2,500 square feet, whichever is less) and Section 15303 of the CEQA Guidelines (new construction or conversion of small structures); and
WHEREAS, on October 17, 2024, the Community and Economic Development Director (“Director”) approved the reasonable accommodation request; and WHEREAS, on October 21, 2024, the City of San Rafael received a timely appeal of the administrative action approving the reasonable accommodation request; and
WHEREAS, on January 13, 2025 the Applicant submitted revised project plans; and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the Planning Commission denies the Appeal in part and approves the Appeal in part, modifying the Director’s approval of the Reasonable Accommodation Request RA24-001 for the proposed additions to the residence at 131 Valley View Avenue to include the revised project plans submitted on January 13, 2025 subject to the findings and conditions below.

- 2 -
Findings (RA24-001)
A. Reasonable Accommodation

1. Whether the housing, which is the subject of the request, will be used by an individual with a disability under the Acts:

The Applicant has provided documentation demonstrating that the property owner, who lives in the home, is an individual with a disability as defined under the Acts.

2. Whether the request for reasonable accommodation is necessary to make specific housing available to an individual with a disability under the Acts:

The Applicant has demonstrated that the existing interior and layout of the of the residence is not suitable for long-term stay for the individual with a disability as defined under the Acts. If the reasonable accommodation permit is not granted, the applicant will be forced to relocate to other housing. The Applicant has demonstrated that the proposed modifications are necessary to make 131 Valley View available to himself so that he can continue to comfortably reside at the property.

3. Whether there is an alternative accommodation which may provide an equivalent level of benefit:

The design of the proposed project would minimize the amount of construction work and expense required to provide the necessary accessibility upgrades:
• Covering the front porch would create a safe transition from the front of the property to the existing entrance.
• Locating the dining room expansion on the northeast portion of the property would avoid the need to regrade the land, as a graded area is already available for development on northeast portion of the property. • The expansion on the northwest portion of the property will allow for safer mobility within the existing bedroom.

All together, the proposed design would require only minimal modifications to the floor plan of the residence, whereas alternative designs would require major modifications to the home’s layout, at a high cost to the homeowner.

There are no alternative accommodations which provide an equivalent level of benefit, taking into account both utility and cost.
- 3 -

4. Whether the requested accommodation would negatively impact surrounding uses or properties:

Concerns have been expressed that the project might negatively impact surrounding properties due to the proximity of the project to the main buildings located on adjacent properties.

While the project will encroach into the required building setback; it will not expand beyond the existing east elevation of the home towards the neighboring property at the northeast, and thereby does not worsen the separation between the two main buildings. Further, the project will not increase the height of the roofline and will not be visible from the public street.

5. Whether the requested reasonable accommodation would impose an undue financial or administrative burden on the city:

The fee for the reasonable accommodation permit has been paid in full to account for staff time and noticing procedures per SRMC Section 14.26.050.

The City would not incur any additional financial or administrative burden.

Thus, the requested accommodation would not impose an undue financial or administrative burden on the City.

6. Whether the requested reasonable accommodation would require a fundamental alteration in the nature of a city program or law, including, but not limited to, land use and zoning:

A reasonable accommodation permit to provide equitable ADA access is permitted per SRMC Chapter 14.26 and is part of the nature of the City’s existing land use planning. Granting the request would not require a fundamental alternation in any City program.

Conditions of Approval (RA24-001)

1. Plans and Representations Become Conditions. All information and representations including the building techniques, materials, elevations and appearance of the project, as presented for approval on plans, dated January 13, 2025, and on file with the Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division, shall be the same as required for the issuance of a building permit, except as modified by these conditions of approval. Minor modifications or revisions to the project shall be subject to review and approval by Planning staff. Modifications deemed not minor by the Community and Economic Development Director may require review and approval as an amendment to the Request for a Reasonable Accommodation. - 4 -

2. Possible Impact of timing of ADU on Project. The Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) shown on the plan set appears to structurally support the proposed addition on the northwest side of the project. If the ADU is not included in the plans submitted for building permit review, the Planning Division may require amended support of the project in a way that is generally consistent with the approved project plans.

3. Conditions Shall be Printed on Plans. The conditions of this permit shall be printed on the second sheet of each plan set submitted for a building permit pursuant to this permit, under the title ‘Request for Reasonable Accommodation Conditions’.

Additional sheets may also be used if the second sheet is not of sufficient size to list all of the conditions. The sheet(s) containing the conditions shall be of the same size as those sheets containing the construction drawings; 8-1/2” by 11” sheets are not acceptable.

4. Applicant Responsible for Compliance with Conditions. The applicant shall ensure compliance with all of the following conditions, including submittal to the project planner of required approval signatures at the times specified. Failure to comply with any condition may result in construction being stopped, issuance of a citation, and/or modification or revocation of this permit.

5. Subject to All Applicable Laws and Regulations. The approved use and/or construction is subject to, and shall comply with, all applicable City Ordinances and laws and regulations of other governmental agencies. Prior to construction, the applicant shall identify and secure all applicable permits from the Building Division, Department of Public Works, the Fire Department and other affected City divisions and departments.

6. Permit Validity. This Permit shall become effective on March 5, 2025 and shall be valid for a period of two (2) years from the date of final approval, or March 5, 2027, and shall become null and void if a building permit is not issued or a time extension granted by March 5, 2027. A permit for the construction of a building or structure is deemed exercised when a valid City building permit, if required, is issued, and construction has lawfully commenced.

7. Construction Hours: Consistent with the City of San Rafael Municipal Code Section

8.13.050.A, construction hours shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 9:00 a.m to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Construction shall not be permitted on Sundays or City-observed holidays. Construction activities shall include delivery of materials, hauling materials off-site; startup of construction equipment engines, arrival of construction workers, paying of radios and other noises caused by equipment and/or construction workers arriving at, or working on, the site.

8. Landscaping. Landscaping and irrigation must meet the Marin Municipal Water District's (MMWD) water conservation rules and regulations. All existing landscaping damaged during construction shall be replaced. All landscaping shall be maintained - 5 -
in a healthy and thriving condition, free of weeds and debris. Any dying or dead landscaping shall be replaced in a timely fashion. No part of the existing landscaping shall be removed, unless their removal has been reviewed and approved by the Planning Division.

9. Exterior Lighting. All exterior lighting shall be energy efficient where feasible; and shielded and directed downward and away from property lines to prevent excessive glare beyond the subject property (per SRMC Section 14.16.227).

The foregoing Resolution was adopted at the regular City of San Rafael Planning Commission meeting held on the 25th day of February, 2025.

Moved by Commissioner _____________ and seconded by Commissioner ________________.

AYES: COMMISSIONERS
NOES: COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS

SAN RAFAEL PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST: BY:

Margaret Kavanaugh-Lynch, Secretary Chair
ATTACHMENT:

Kate Colin, Mayor • Maribeth Bushey, Vice Mayor • Rachel Kertz, Councilmember • Maika Llorens Gulati, Councilmember • Eli Hill, Councilmember October 17, 2024
Habibolah Hastaie & Carol Underwood
131 Valley View Ave
San Rafael, CA 94901
Via Email:

Re: PLAN23-151 - Administrative Action to Approve Project; 131 Valley View (APN: 010-081-18)
To Habibolah Hastaie & Carol Underwood:

The City of San Rafael has received the re-submittal of your application for several improvements to the existing residence at 131 Valley View Avenue. The application includes additions at the front and rear of the residence, which as shown would require an exception to the hillside property development standards pursuant San Rafael Municipal Code (SRMC) Section 14.12.040, but have requested to be waived as a request for reasonable accommodation pursuant to SRMC Chapter

14.26. This letter is to advise you that staff has approved the project based on the findings and subject to the conditions outlined in the attached document.

Please note that this action is subject to subject to a five working day appeal period, pursuant to SRMC Chapter 14.28, which expires on Thursday, October 24, 2024 at 5:00 pm. Additionally, project conditions of approval must be satisfied with construction permits and/or other required approvals or actions to implement the project.

Should you have any immediate questions please do not hesitate to contact me at (415) 485-3397 or [email protected].

Sincerely,
Renee Nickenig, Associate Planner

CITY OF SAN RAFAEL

ATTACHMENTS

1. Findings and Conditions

2. Project Plans
cc: Application Address File
CITY OF SAN RAFAEL I 1400 FIFTH AVENUE, SAN RAFAEL, CALIFORNIA 94901 I CITYOFSANRAFAEL.ORG Request for Reasonable Accommodation
Project No. RA24-001 (PLAN23-151)
Address: 131 Valley View
Zoning District: Residential (R20-H)
Type of Use: Single-Family Residential – Hillside Development Overlay District Approved: Yes Effective Date: 10/25/2024
Signature: 10/17/2024
Project Description
A Reasonable Accommodation request has been submitted pursuant to San Rafael Municipal Code (SRMC) Section 14.26.060 to accommodate the proposed project. This permit supplants other discretionary land use permits, including a Major Environmental and Design Review and Hillside Exception, pursuant to SRMC Section 14.12.040.

The proposed project includes:

1. the enclosure and expansion of the front porch;

2. the addition of a bay window at the front of the residence; the enclosure of an existing covered porch at the east;

3. the expansion of the bedroom at the northwest (rear) of the residence; and

4. the expansion of the existing dining room at the southwest (rear) of the residence.

The project plans submitted also include an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU). The ADU will be reviewed as a ministerial permit and not as part of the Reasonable Accommodation request.

Staff notes that the project is not compliant with San Rafael Municipal Code (SRMC) Section

14.12.030, as the additions at the northeast and east of the residence will encroach into the required setbacks and the overall project will result in additional development on a visually significant ridgeline. However, a Reasonable Accommodation request has been submitted proposing an exception to these standards, subject to the findings listed below.

CEQA Finding
Yes No
The project is categorically
exempt from the provisions of
the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) and none
of the exceptions of Section
15300.2 apply.

X The project has been determined to be exempt from
the provisions of CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
Section 15303 - New Construction or Conversion of
Small Structures.

I I
~J,,,in .. ·•-
JI
V

Request for Reasonable Accommodation Findings (SRMC §14.26.060) Yes No
Findings. The written decision to grant or deny a request for reasonable accommodation shall be consistent with the Acts and shall be based on consideration of the following factors:

1. Whether the housing,
which is the subject of the
request, will be used by an
individual with a disability
under the Acts;
X The applicant has provided documentation
demonstrating that the property owner, who lives in
the home, is an individual with a disability as defined under the Acts.

2. Whether the request for
reasonable accommodation
is necessary to make
specific housing available to
an individual with a disability
under the Acts;
X The applicant has demonstrated that the existing
interior and layout of the of the residence is not
suitable for long-term stay for the individual with a
disability as defined under the Acts. If the reasonable accommodation permit is not granted, the applicant
will be forced to relocate to other housing. The
applicant has demonstrated that the proposed
modifications are necessary to make 131 Valley View
available to herself so that she can continue to
comfortably reside at the property.

3. Whether there is an
alternative accommodation
which may provide an
equivalent level of benefit;
X The design of the proposed project would minimize
the amount of construction work and expense
required to provide the necessary accessibility
upgrades:
• Covering the front porch would create a safe
transition from the front of the property to the
existing entrance.
• Locating the dining room expansion on the
northwest portion of the property would avoid
the need to regrade the land, as a graded
area is already available for development on
northwest portion of the property.
• The expansion on the southwest portion of
the property will allow for safer mobility within
the existing bedroom.

All together, the proposed design would require only
minimal modifications to the floor plan of the
residence, whereas alternative designs would
Request for Reasonable Accommodation
Project No. RA24-001 (PLAN23-151)
require major modifications to the home’s layout, at
a high cost to the homeowner. There are no
alternative accommodations which provide an
equivalent level of benefit, taking into account both
utility and cost.

4. Whether the requested
accommodation would
negatively impact
surrounding uses or
properties;
X Concerns have been expressed that the project might
negatively impact surrounding properties due to the
proximity of the project to the main buildings located
on adjacent properties.

While the project will encroach into the required
building setback; it will not expand beyond the
existing east elevation of the home towards the
neighboring property at the northeast, and thereby
does not worsen the separation between the two
main buildings. Further, the project will not increase
the height of the roofline and will not be visible from the public street.

5. Whether the requested
reasonable accommodation
would impose an undue
financial or administrative
burden on the city; and
X The fee for the reasonable accommodation permit
has been paid in full to account for staff time and
noticing procedures per SRMC Section 14.26.050.

The City would not incur any additional financial or
administrative burden. Thus, the requested
accommodation would not impose an undue financial
or administrative burden on the City.

6. Whether the requested
reasonable accommodation
would require a
fundamental alteration in
the nature of a city program
or law, including, but not
limited to, land use and
zoning.

X A reasonable accommodation permit to provide
equitable ADA access is permitted per SRMC
Chapter 14.26 and is part of the nature of the City’s
existing land use planning. Granting the request
would not require a fundamental alternation in any
City program.

The Federal Fair Housing Act of and California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act impose an affirmative duty on local governments to make reasonable accommodation in their land use and zoning regulations and practices when such accommodation may be necessary to afford individuals with disabilities an equal opportunity to housing. Per SRMC Section

14.26.060(A), the written decision to grant or deny a request for reasonable accommodation shall be consistent with the Federal Fair Housing Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act and shall be based on consideration of the factors above. No single factor is I

dispositive in making a decision on a reasonable accommodation request; rather, the factors are considered all together. Here, five of the six factors weigh in favor of granting the reasonable accommodation request. The only factor that weighs against granting the request is whether the requested accommodation has a negative impact on surrounding properties.

While neighbors have expressed their concern that the additions would negatively impact their properties, the setback between the two main buildings is not decreased or worsened.

Further, as conditioned, the project will be reviewed by the proper departments to ensure safe construction. Accordingly, the City finds that the impacts would be minimal. Considering these factors on the whole, the City finds that, consistent with the Federal Fair Housing Act and California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act, the reasonable accommodation request must be approved.

Public Notice
Pursuant to SRMC Section 14.26.050, notice was mailed to the owners of record of all properties that are immediately adjacent to the subject property fifteen (15) days prior to the rendering of this decision. Two requests for information on the project were received and staff met with a set of concerned neighbors. No no additional comments have been shared with the city as of the date of the creation of this document.

Planning Division Conditions of Approval

1. Plans and Representations Become Conditions. All information and representations including the building techniques, materials, elevations and appearance of the project, as presented for approval on plans, dated March 15, 2024, and on file with the Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division, shall be the same as required for the issuance of a building permit, except as modified by these conditions of approval. Minor modifications or revisions to the project shall be subject to review and approval by Planning staff. Modifications deemed not minor by the Community and Economic Development Director may require review and approval as an amendment to the Request for a Reasonable Accommodation.

2. Possible Impact of timing of ADU on Project. The ADU shown on the plan set appears to structurally support the proposed addition on the northwest side of the project. If the ADU is not included in the plans submitted for building permit review, the Planning Division may require amended support of the project in a way that is generally consistent with the approved project plans.

3. Conditions Shall be Printed on Plans. The conditions of this Permit shall be printed on the second sheet of each plan set submitted for a building permit pursuant to this permit, under the title ‘Request for Reasonable Accommodation Conditions’. Additional sheets may also be used if the second sheet is not of sufficient size to list all of the conditions.

The sheet(s) containing the conditions shall be of the same size as those sheets containing the construction drawings; 8-1/2” by 11” sheets are not acceptable.

4. Applicant Responsible for Compliance with Conditions. The applicant shall ensure compliance with all of the following conditions, including submittal to the project planner Request for Reasonable Accommodation
Project No. RA24-001 (PLAN23-151)
of required approval signatures at the times specified. Failure to comply with any condition may result in construction being stopped, issuance of a citation, and/or modification or revocation of this permit.

5. Subject to All Applicable Laws and Regulations. The approved use and/or construction is subject to, and shall comply with, all applicable City Ordinances and laws and regulations of other governmental agencies. Prior to construction, the applicant shall identify and secure all applicable permits from the Building Division, Public Works Department and other affected City divisions and departments.

6. Permit Validity. This Permit shall become effective on October 25, 2024 and shall be valid for a period of two (2) years from the date of final approval, or October 25, 2026, and shall become null and void if a building permit is not issued or a time extension granted by October 25, 2026. A permit for the construction of a building or structure is deemed exercised when a valid City building permit, if required, is issued, and construction has lawfully commenced.

7. Construction Hours: Consistent with the City of San Rafael Municipal Code Section

8.13.050.A, construction hours shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 9:00 a.m to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Construction shall not be permitted on Sundays or City-observed holidays. Construction activities shall include delivery of materials, hauling materials off-site; startup of construction equipment engines, arrival of construction workers, paying of radios and other noises caused by equipment and/or construction workers arriving at, or working on, the site.

8. Landscaping. Landscaping and irrigation must meet the Marin Municipal Water District's (MMWD) water conservation rules and regulations. All existing landscaping damaged during construction shall be replaced. All landscaping shall be maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, free of weeds and debris. Any dying or dead landscaping shall be replaced in a timely fashion. No part of the existing landscaping shall be removed, unless their removal has been reviewed and approved by the Planning Division.

9. Exterior Lighting. All exterior lighting shall be energy efficient where feasible; and shielded and directed downward and away from property lines to prevent excessive glare beyond the subject property (per SRMC Section 14.16.227).

PROJECT SITE DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 03.15.24 RA24-001 (PLAN23-151) October 17, 2024 Renee Nickenig, Associate Planner *
* ADU SHOWN IS NOT INCLUDED IN APPROVAL

ADDITION & NEW ATTACHED ADU
APN: 010-081-18

DESIGNER'S STATEMENT

THIS PLOT PLAN CORRECTLY REPRESENTS A PLOT
PLAN MADE BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION.

I HEREBY STATE THAT TO THE BEST OF MY

KNOWLEDGE ALL PROVISIONS OF APPLICABLE STATE LAWS AND LOCAL ORDINANCES HAVE BEEN COMPLIED WITH.

DESIGNER
- ll~1;;;~rA-_ Hector Orozco z::,i-- -- -
MARCH 14, 2024
DATE

DESIGNER
TITLE

VICINITY MAP
•
.....

SYMBOL LEGEND
HEIGHT

SECTION

ELEVATION DETAIL

GRID LINE
DOOR
WINDOW
NOTE
AX.X
@t-----
®
0 @
n n

CODE COMPLIANCE

DESCRIPTION OF WORK

ADDITION
- NEW ATTACHED ADU ( ONE BATH AND TWO BEDROOMS )

PROJECT INFORMATION
LOT SIZE: 6,745 SQ.FT.

CONSTRUCTION: TYPE V B UNPROTECTED WOOD FRAME R-3
SPRINKLER: NO
PARCEL #: 010-081-18 EXISTING LIVING AREA = 1,375 SQ.FT. EXISTING GARAGE AREA = 721 SQ.FT. (NO CHANGE) REAR ADDITION = 278 SQ.FT + 86 SQ.FT.

FRONT ADDITION = 43 SQ.FT.

TOTAL ADDITION AREA = 407 SQ.FT.

PORCH CONVERSION AREA = 63 SQ.FT.

NEW ATTACHED ADU = 702 SQ.FT.

TOTAL LIVING AREA = 2,547 Sq. Ft. (EXISTING + ADDITION + NEW ADU) LOT COVERAGE {EXCLUDING ADU AREA) = 1892/6745 = 28%
2022 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE (INCORPORATES BY ADOPTION AND REPRINTS THE 2015 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE WITH CALIFORNIA AMENDMENTS. PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL, ICC) 2022 CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE - APPLIES TO ONE AND TWO FAMILY HOUSES AND TOWN HOMES LESS THAN 3 STORIESIN HEIGHT. (INCORPORATES BY ADOPTION AND REPRINTS THE 2015 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE.) 2022 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE. CHECK THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION'S WEBSITE AT HTTP: //WWW.ENERGY.CA.GOV FOR A DOWNLOADABLE VERSION. (PUBLISHED BY ICC).
2022 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE (INCORPORATES BY ADOPTION AND REPRINTS THE 2015 NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE WITH CALIFORNIA AMENDMENTS. PUBLISHED BY THE NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION AGENCY, NFPA) 2022 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE (INCORPORATES BY ADOPTION AND REPRINTS THE 2015 UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE WITH CALIFORNIA AMENDMENTS. PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF PLUMBING AND MECHANICAL OFFICIALS, IAPMO) 2022 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE (INCORPORATES BY ADOPTION AND REPRINTS THE 2015 UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE WITH CALIFORNIA AMENDMENTS. PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF PLUMBING AND MECHANICAL OFFICIALS, IAPMO) 2022 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE (INCORPORATES BY ADOPTION AND REPRINTS THE 2015 INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE WITH CALIFORNIA AMENDMENTS. PUBLISHED BY ICC)
2022 CALGREEN CODE - APPLIES TO CERTAIN NEW BUILDINGS ONLY - ALL NEW RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS 3 STORIES OR LESS AND ALL NEW NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS.

DRAWING NOTE
TYPICAL OWNER/DEVELOPER BUILDING PERMIT SET OF DRAWINGS:

THESE DRAWINGS ARE INTENDED FOR BUILDING PERMIT APPROVAL AND ARE NOT INTENDED TO BE A

COMPREHENSIVE SET OF DRAWINGS INDICATING CONSTRUCTION DETAILS, WATER PROOFING, SPECIFIC FINISHES,

SPECIFIC CABINETRY, SPECIFIC PLUMBING FIXTURES, LIGHTING FIXTURES, SPECIFIC DOORS, WINDOWS, & HARDWARE, OR M.E.P. & UTILITY ROUTING. OWNER/DEVELOPER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SELECTION OF THESE

ITEMS AND CLARIFICATION AND COORDINATION OF THESE WITH THE CONTRACTOR AS PART OF THE BUILDING CONTRACT AND CONSTRUCTION PROCESS. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CONFIRMING CODE COMPLIANCE OF

ALL WORK NOT FULLY REFLECTED IN THESE DOCUMENTS AS WELL AS ANY REVISIONS TO THIS SCOPE WITH THE ENTITIES HAVING JURISDICTION. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING A COMPLETE, STRUCTURALLY

SOUND, FULLY OPERATIONAL, CODE COMPLIANT, FINISHED WORK WITH COMPLETE PROTECTION AGAINST ELEMENTS.

NATURAL STATE OF LOT CALCULATION {NOT INCLUDING ADU):

LOT AREA = 6,745 SQ.FT. BUILDING TOTAL COVERAGE = 1,892 SQ.FT.

CONCRETE AREA = 412 SQ.FT.

NATURAL STATE REMAINING = 65.8%

SHEET INDEX
A-0 TITLE A-1 SITE PLAN A-2 EXISTING FLOOR PLAN A-3 PROPOSED FLOOR PLAN ADU A-3a PROPOSED FLOOR PLAN ADITION A-4 EXISTING ELEVATIONS A-5 PROPOSED ELEVATIONS A-Sa PROPOSED ELEVATIONS A-6 PLAN NOTES A- 7 ROOF PLAN & SECTIONS A-8 UTILITY PLAN A-9 TITLE 24 A-10 TITLE 24 A-11 TITLE 24 POR. RANCHO SAN PEDRO, SANTA MARGARITA, Y LAS GALLINAS Tax Rate Area 8-000
89 -000
@Pc!~
!. 2,' Ac,
A'.•,-;,--.s-:---., ·,.
"'-., ..
@)
l.27J.c
N58"WWW ~16.H
-i>._._..J' = . .J9.
rz 7 ~?, .sn•.:u:r
.

RS05-17ff t1, a' lffW ••
@
100.v.1012 MEM
H .a N ,.., t- S
Bu< PRIOR ,4F'/ol N!:W APN YR Al.ff/I
002 SUR.-EYS 00

RFAIOCKF()
VIEW 1.17 Ac.
@
I.SB Ac
NOTE-Asses.so(s 8'o,k Numbe,s Shown in- f/fjpses,
Asses.sor·s Paree! Nvmbers Shown in Cirdes.
pM.10-27 \
Assessor's Map Bk. /0 -Pg. 08
County of Marin, Calif.

ABBREVIATIONS
A.B./ANCHOR BOLT E./EAST I.D./INSIDE DIAMETER P.A./PLANTING AREA S1L./STEEL ABV./ABOVE (E)/EXISTING IN./INCH P.B./PANIC BAR STRL./STRUC1\JRAL A.C./ASPHAL TIC CONCRETE EA./EACH INCAND./INCANDESCENT P.C.P. /PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL S4S/SURFACE FOUR SIDES A.C.T./ACOUSTICAL CEILING TILE E.J./EXPANSION JOINT INCR./INCREMENT PERIM./PERIMETER S2S/SURFACE TWO SIDES A/C/AIR CONDITIONING EL/ELEVATION INFO./INFORMATION PL./PLATE S.S./STAINLESS STEEL ACOUS./ ACOUSTICAL ELAS./ELASTOMERIC INSUL./INSULATION PL .G./PLATE GLASS SVC/SERVICE A.D./AREA DRAIN ELEC./ELECTRICAL INT./1NTERIOR P.LAM./PLASTIC LAMINATE STOR /STORAGE ADMIN./ADMINISTRATION ELEV. /ELEVA TOR PLAS. /PLASTER SUSP./SUSPENDED ADJ./ADJUSTABLE EMER./EMERGENCY JAN./JANITOR PLBG./PLUMBING S. W./SOUTHWEST A.F.F./ABOVE FINISHED FLOOR ENCL./ENCLOSURE JST./JOIST PL YWD./PL YWOOD S.W.S./SEE WINDOW SCHEDULE AGGR./ AGGREGRA TE ENGR./ENGINEER JT./JOINT PNL./PANEL SYM./SYMMETRICAL AL./ALUMINUM EQ./EQUAL PR./PAIR ALT./ALTERNATE EQUIP./EQUIPMENT Kil/KITCHEN PREP./PREPARA TION T./TREAD A. P. / ACCESS PANEL E.S./EACH SIDE K.P./KICK PL P.S.F./POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT T.B./TACKBOARD APP/APPLICATION EXP./EXPANSION LAB./LABORA TORY
P.S.1./POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH TECH./TECHNOLOGY
APPROX./APPROXIMATE EXH./EXHAUST P.T./PRESSURE TREATED TELE./TELEPHONE ARCH./ARCHITEC1\JRAL EXIST./EXISTING LAM./LAMINATE PT./POINT TEMP./TEMPERED or TEMPERATURE ASPH./ASPHALT EXT./EXTERIOR LAV./LAVATORY P.T.D./PAPER TOWEL DISPENSER TER./TERRAZZO A TTEN./ A ffiNUA TING E.W./EACH WAY LB./POUND P1N./PARTITION T & G/TONGUE & GROOVE L.F./LINEAR FEET PVC/POLYVINYL CHLORIDE THK./THICK
BD./BOARD F./FREEZER L.H./LEFT HAND PVMT./PAVEMENT THRES./THRESHOLD BET. /BETWEEN F.A./FIRE ALARM LIN./LINEAR T.0./TOP OF
B.F./BRACED FRAME F.A.F./FORCED AIR FURNACE LKR./LOCKER R./RISER OR REFRIGERATOR T.O.C./TOP OF CURB or CONCRETE BLDG./BUILDING F.D./FLOOR DRAIN L.L.H./LONG LEG HORIZONTAL (R)/REMOVE T.O.D./TOP OF DECKING BLK./BLOCKING FND./FOUNDATION L.P./LOW POINT R.A./RETURN AIR T.O.M./TOP OF MASONRY BM./BEAM F.E./FIRE EXTINGUISHER LT./LIGHT RAD./RADIUS T.O.P./TOP OF PAVEMENT or BOT./BOTTOM F.E.C./FIRE EXTINGUISHER & LVR./LOUVER R.B./RUBBER BASE PARAPET CABINET R.C.P./REFLECTED CEILING PLAN T.O.S./TOP OF STEEL CAB./CABINET FED./FEDERAL MACH./MACHINE R.D./ROOF DRAIN T.O. W./TOP OF WALL C/C/CENTER TO CENTER F.V./FIELD VERIFY MAINT./MAINTENANCE REF./REFERENCE T.S./TUBULAR STEEL CEM./CEMENT F.F./FINISH FLOOR MATL./MATERIAL REF/REFRIGERATOR T.S.C.D./TOILET SEAT COVER CER./CERAMIC F.H.C./FIRE HOSE CABINET MAS./MASONRY REFR./REFRIGERATION DISPENSER C.F./CUBIC FEET FIN./FINISH MAX./MAXIMUM REINF./REINFORCED T. T.D./TOILET TISSUE DISPENSER CH/CHANNEL Fl X. /FIX1\JRE M.B./MARKER BOARD or REQD./REQUIRED TV /TELEVISION C.1./CAST IRON F.L/FLOW LINE MACHINE BOLT REV./REVISION OR RE~SED TYP./TYPICAL C.J./CONTROL JOINT FLR./FLOOR M.C./MEDICINE CABINET RESIL./RESILIENT C.L/CENTERLINE FLUOR./FLUORESCENT MECH./MECHANICAL R.H./RIGHT HAND U.B.C./UNIFORM BUILDING CODE CLG./CEILING F.0./F ACE OF MEMB./MEMBRANE RM./ROOM U.G./UNDERGROUND CLKG./CAULKING F.O.C./FACE OF CONCRETE MEP /MECHANICAL/ELECTRICAL R.0./ROUGH OPENING U.L./UNDER\\RITERS LABORATORY CLO./CLOSET F.O.F./FACE OF FINISH & PLUMBING R\\IJ./REDWOOD UNF./UNFINISHED CLR./CLEAR F.O.M./FACE OF MASONRY MET./METAL R.W.L./RAINWATER U.O.N./UNLESS OTHER\\1SE NOTED LEADER C.M.U./CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT F.O.S./FACE OF STUD MFR./MANUFACTURER UR./URINAL Ml C /TC/MICROWAVE/TOASTER COL/COLUMN F.O.W./FACE OF WALL S./SOUTH COMP./COMPUTER FPRF./FIREPROOF(ING} OVEN SA/SUPPLY AIR V.C.T./~NYL COMPOSITION TILE MIN./MINIMUM CONC./CONCRETE FRM'G/FRAMING S.B./SCOREBOARD VERT./VERTICAL CONF./CONFERENCE F.R.T./FIRE RETARDANT TREATED MIR./MIRROR S.C./SOLID CORE VEST./VESTIBULE CONT./CONTINUOUS F.R.P./FIBERGLASS REINFORCED MISC./MISCELLANEOUS S.C.D./SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS V.G.D.F./VERTICAL GRAIN DOUGLAS CONTR./CONTRACTOR POLYESTER MK./MARK SCHED./SCHEDULE FIR CONST./CONSTRUCTION F.S./FLOOR SINK M.0./MASONRY OPENING S.D./STORM DRAIN V.I.F./VERIFY IN FIELD CORR./CORRIDOR F.S.E./FOOD SER~CE MTD./MOUNTED S.D.S./SEE DOOR SCHEDULE VOL. /VOLUME MTL./METAL V. T.R./VENT THRU ROOF (S .. P.D. CPT./CARPET EQUIPMENT S.E./SOUTHEAST C.R./COLD-ROLLED FT./FOOT OR FEET MUL/MULLION S.E.D./SEE ELECTRICAL DRA\\1NGS V.W.C./~NYL WALL COVERING CSMT./CASEMENT FTG./FOOTING N./NORTH SECT./SECTION W./WEST OR WASHER C.T./CERAMIC TILE FURR./FURRING S.F./SQUARE FOOT (FEET) FUT./FUTURE (N)/NEW W/ /\\1TH CTR./CENTER N/A/NOT APPLICABLE S.F.S./SEE (ROOM) FINISH SCHEDULE W.C./WATER CLOSET CTSK./COUNTERSUNK GA./GAUGE N.E./NORTHEAST S.G.S./SEE GLAZING SCHEDULE W/0/WASHER/DRYER C.Y./CUBIC YARDS SHT./SHEET GALV./GALVANIZED N.I.C./NOT IN CONTRACT SHTG./SHEATHING WD./WOOD G.LB./GLUE- LAMINATED NO./NUMBER WDW./l'i1NDOW D./DRYER (WOOD) BEAM NOM./NOMINAL SIM./SIMILAR W.F./\\1DE FLANGE DBL/DOUBLE S.L.D./SEE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS GL /GLASS N. T.S./NOT TO SCALE WGL/\\1RE GLASS DECK./DECKING S.M./SHEET METAL DEG./DEGREE GND./GROUND N. W./NORTHWEST SL /SLOPE W.H./WATER HEATER G.R.G./GLASS REINFORCED W.I.C./WOODWORK INSTI1\JTE OF DEMO./DEMOLITION OBS./OBSCURE SMACNA /SHEET METAL AND AIR DEPT./DEPARTMENT GYPSUM CONDITIONING CONTRACTORS CALIFORNIA DET./DETAIL G.S.M./GALVANIZED SHEET 0. C. /ON CENTER NATIONAL ASSOCIATION W.0./WHERE OCCURS D.F./DRINKING FOUNTAIN METAL O.D./OUTSIDE DIAMETER or S.M.D./SEE MECHANICAL DRA\\1NGS W/0/WITHOUT GYP ./GYPSUM DIMENSION W.P./WORKING POINT DI A. /DIAMETER O.F.C.1./0WNER FURNISHED, S.M.S/SHEET METAL SCREW DIM./DIMENSION G. W.B./GYPSUM WALL BOARD S.N.D./ SANITARY NAPKIN DISPENSER WSCT./WAINSCOT CONTRACTOR INSTALLED W.S.P./WET STANDPIPE DIR./DIRECTION O.F.D./OVERFLOW DRAIN S.N.R./SANITARY NAPKIN RECEPTACLE DISP./DISPOSAL H.B./HOSE BIBB O.F.S./OVERFLOW SCUPPER S.O.G./SLAB ON GRADE WT./WEIGHT DIST./DISTRIBUTION H.C./HOLLOW CORE 0. H. /OVER HEAD S.P.D./SEE PLUMBING DRAWINGS W.W.F./WELDED \\1RE FABRIC DIV./DIVISION HDWR./HARDWARE SPEC./SPECIFICA TION HDWD./HARDWOOD OPNG./OPENING & /AND DN./OOWN HT./HEIGHT OPP. HD./ OPPOSITE HAND SPR/SPRINKLERED @ /AT DR./DOOR H.M./HOLLOW METAL OZ./OUNCE S.P.S./SEE PARTITION SCHEDULE /CHANNEL D.S./DOWNSPOUT HORIZ./HORIZONTAL SQJSQUARE d /PENNY D.S.A./ DIVISION OF STATE H.P./HIGH POINT S.S.D./SEE STRUCTURAL DRA\\1NGS # /POUND OR NUMBER ARCHITECT STD./STANDARD D.S.P./DRY STAND PIPE HVAC/HEATING, VENTILATING,
DWG./DRAWING AIR CONDITIONING

GENERAL NOTES

1. THE DESIGN PRESENTED IN THESE DRAWINGS ESTABLISHES THE GENERAL ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROJECT. IT DOES NOT PRESENT ALL DETAILS REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION.

THE CONTRACTOR IS EXPECTED TO EXERCISE SOUND JUDGMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH CODE REQUIREMENTS.

2. THE DRAWINGS INDICATE LOCATION AND DIMENSONS, BUT THEY DO NOT ILLUSTRATE EVERY CONDITION. IN THE EVENT THAT CERTAIN FEATURES ARE NOT FULLY SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS OR CALLED FOR IN THE SPECIFICATIONS, THEIR CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CONVENTIONAL PRACTICES OF THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE.

3. ALL CONDITIONS AFFECTING WORK PROGRESS AND CONFORMANCE TO PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED BY THE CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO START OF WORK.

4. ANY SITE AND BUILDING AREAS UNAFFECTED BY THIS WORK SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM ANY DAMAGE CAUSED BY THIS WORK. ANY DAMAGE TO EXISTING STRUCTURES AND BUILDING ELEMENTS SO CALLED, SHALL BE THE FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR.

5. ANY WASTE AND REFUSE, CAUSED BY THIS WORK SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE PREMISES AND DISPOSED OF IN A LEGAL MANNER BY THE CONTRACTOR PER CITY'S GREEN WASTE STANDARDS.

6. SEE CAL GREEN CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR MATERIALS MOISTURE CONTENT.

7. PROPERTY BOUNDARY, AND LOCATION OF THE NEW STRUCTURES ON SITE SHALL BE ESTABLISHED BY A LICENSE SURVEYOR.

TITLE PLAN
0 u
N
0 L
0 L
0 &f::j~
+-'
u
Q)
:r:
a~ . . L Q)

C I CJ)
·-
en
Q)
0 Q)
L >0 <(O) Q) -.:I"
C ~O)
3::: w
-
0 -c >u
-........._
+-' >-_J
C WW
0 _J<( _J LL
u <(<( ·-- > 0:::

Q_ I Q_ I ~z I"')<( <( I ~lf)
A-0
EXISTING BUILDING ADDITION NEW ATTACHED ADU PORCH CONVERSION DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 03.15.24 CITY OF SAN RAFAEL - PLANNING DIVISION 7 MARK: APPROVED w/ Conditions 323.9 '
12" STU
8" TR[[
6" STUMP
6" TR[[
5" TR[[
.,
(jl
(jl
•
Z7.~
0 ~'- 1t7 o ...

EX-Tc 332.66'
EX-FL 332.25'
-+>
<5' ...
...
:z
<...,,-\
er>
• c..O
-+> ...
573·01·oo"W 73.59 '
.,
<D
'~/ [X. CONC. ST[PS
' I:> ""
' ""
I:>
"" I:>
I:>
' ., ""
I:> [X. -0R/V[WAY
'v'
' I:> '
.,
I:>
.,
6" fR[[
I
1 0)
"1
N
CJ7
VALLEY
.
"1
0 I")
.,
.,
.,
(Jl
___.
(Jl
-5'
.,
""
' "
.
-
<.o
"1
' ""
' I:>
.,
.,
hS:~l
WOOD[N POST
ROOF OUTLIN[
APN 1
[X. UTILITY BOX
EX-Tc 345_ 09 ,
EX-FL 344.65' SITE PLAN
0 u
N
0 L
0 L
+-' 0 &.-N u ...---
i
L'. 8
Q) '----.....5 r---
c I
.01 ~o en ...---
Q) LO
0 Q)
>0
<(~
C ~m
3:: w :
0 >8
-........._
+-' >- _J C WW
0 _J <( _J LL u <( <(
·- > 0:::
o_ I o_ I ~z
<(
A-1

DEMO WALL
1 ABAB
2 3
1 2
3 EXISTING WALL DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 03.15.24 CITY OF SAN RAFAEL - PLANNING DIVISION APPROVED w/ Conditions
• 0,
I
;,.,
N
• 0,
I
"' N
• r--.

I
;,-,
•
I
0 • 0
I
-:.,.

N
(E) C
58'-5"
13'-7" 6'-8" 7'-4" 10'-9"
<9
il)D G]rJ 0 0 (E) BA TI-I
(E) BATI-1
(E) KITCHEN
a (E) PRIMARY BEDROOM I@ • @
(E) LINEN
(E) HALL
(E) CL @
(E) CL (E) HALL
@I
(E) BEDROOM (E) BEDROOM
(E) PORCH
12'-6" 1 l'-1" 3'-1" g'

EXISTING UPPER FLOOR PLAN
SCALE: 1/ 4' = 1'
30'-7"
26'-3" 3'-5"
(E) GARAGE

EXISTING LOWER FLOOR PLAN (GARAGE)
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'
12'-1" 6'
@ @j)
(E) DINING ':.,- (E) PORCH I 0
@j)
r L..-------------
• "' (E) LIVING F.P. I -:.,.
@
18' -1"
t:EADER !5<J1fPI I f·
-4 X LP TO ,4' OFl=NINE> -4 X f> LP TO 6 OFl=NINEi -4 X l:1. LP TO fl OFl=NINEi

DOOR SCHEDULE

TAG I SIZE TYPE I MODEL I REMARKS
@i) 3'-Q" X 6'-8" HINGED VlNYL
@ 2'-6" X 6'-8" HINGED VlNYL @ 17'8"-0" X 6'-8" HINGED VlNYL

WINDOW SCHEDULE
SEE TYPICAL COOSTRUCllOII NOlES FOR ADDITIONAL \\INDOW INFORMATION TAG SIZE TYPE MANUF. MODEL REMARKS w X H
0 6'x3' SLIDING VINYL
3'x3' SLIDING VlNYL
<§> 8'x4' SLIDING VlNYL
<B> 6'x4' SLIDING VlNYL
<v 1 o'x5' SLIDING VlNYL
i> 4'x3' SLIDING VlNYL

EXISTING FLOOR PLAN
0 u
N
0 L
0 L
0 +-'
u
(I)
:r:

L
(I)
C
3::
0 -........._
+-'
C
0 u
Q_ Q_
<(
Q)
>0
<(°' -.:t-
~O)
w -
-c >u
>-_J
WW
_J<(
_J LL
<(<( > 0:::

A-2
EXISTING WALL $GFCI NEW WALL REF. NEW ATTACHED ADU (A= 702 SQ.FT.) 1 AB 2 3 SEE SHEET A-6 FOR PLAN NOTES DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 03.15.24 CITY OF SAN RAFAEL - PLANNING DIVISION APPROVED w/ Conditions
N N
<O
"' PORCH
13'-4"
PORCH
13'
.BEDROOM
·~•· CL F ~ i:=-=::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
. CL
••• • . .- . .-.-.. • .. • . .". '</)" ."
••• • . .- . .-.-. .- . .- . .-. z ·.-
• • • • • ·.-.-_g'_.:.,.a~-•
• • • • • BEDROOM
.......... : :- : !:i· :-
1 ......... .• .. ·.·.· •.•.•.•.• ... ·.·. • ffi •r· . ···.· ··· ·(@·~·•• ..•.· •• ••••••••••••••• ·.·· . . . '---- I ........ . . . . . . . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... .
••• •• • •• ••• •• •• •••••••• <KitCHEN <••· > <••····•······ >•§)• >••· •••>• "<o
I
"'
0 ....,
" . ·• ·• ··••Ld .. [j[J~ ,,~ " +--t--+t==-~=====i;:==t ,..L::::...::::...::::...=..:i...::::.....=-.=-.=-.=-. =-::::...::::...::::...::...:_::...::c... ~~~~:,_E..::..::...=-.=.._i_:::_:::_~:::_:":_~:__. 5...E,__::...::... =-.~=-=-=-=-=-:i..=-=-=-=-.=t1----------+ • 0
I
<t
N
GLASS
@JI
(E) GARAGE
29'-8"

PROPOSED ATTACHED ADU FLOOR PLAN
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'
•
I
;,.,
TAG I
@) @
TAG
0 <§> <§>
0 0
SIZE
3'-Q" X 6'-8"
2'-6" X 6'-8"
:-: :-:-:-:-: :-: : :-:-:-: I
HEADfR 6Ctl:0 I f:
4 X '- LP TO ,V ~INE':I 4 X & LP TO _,. ~INE':I
4 X IZ LP TO &' ~INE':I

DOOR SCHEDULE

I TYPE I MODEL I

HINGED HINGED

REMARKS
v1NYL v1NYL

WINDOW SCHEDULE
SEE TYPICAL CONSlRUCTION NOTES FOO ADDITIONAL YtllllOW INFORMATION SIZE TYPE MANUF. MODEL REMARKS w X H
6'x4' SLIDING - - v1NYL 6'x5' SLIDING - - v1NYL
4'x4' SLIDING - - v1NYL
3'x1' SLIDING - - v1NYL
3'x3' SLIDING - - v1NYL
3'x5' SLIDING - - v1NYL
U.F. SHGC
FOR NEW ~NOOWS
El EGJRICAL LfGENP
DUPLEX OUlLET I[])
I[]) DUPLEX OUlLET W/ GROUND FAULT
SWITCH
\ ,,,.- WIRING
-¢- CEILING/PENDANT LIGHT
<ll FAN WITH LIGHT

RECESS LIGHT
" r:ti:lBK:,IL trn@
1- El.UTRIUL ITcM5 st'UtlN 5ttf'MATJ,', ,W Tit
IN5T IU.ATION 6HIU.. llE RE\IIEM:D r,y Tit lll.l..DIOO IN6f'Et.TOR IN Tit Fli.P.

1. IU. tlJll.EI" 6Pla\'EI, 'Elfl' ~6, P!Ni. taATION5
,W LDID 6HIU.. PERTANI00/1..iUL ure
~6.
,. N:W MNMM IOO !NP 61:RVla: llE IN61" IU. FOR Tit
N:W D'M:LLINE':I PER tEC- 2/713.

PROPOSED FLOOR PLAN ADU
0 u
N
0 L
0 L
0 +-'
u
Q)
:r:

L
Q)
C
$'.
0 -........._
+-'
C
0 u
Q_ Q_
<(
Q)
>0
<(O) -.:t-
~O)
w -
-c >u
>-_J
WW
_J<(
_J LL
<(<( > 0:::

A-3
(STORAGE /LAUNDRY) EXISTING WALL 1 AB $GFCI NEW WALL PORCH CONVERSION = 63 SQ.FT. A ADDITION = 407 SQ.FT. SEE SHEET A-8 FOR PLAN NOTES DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 03.15.24 CITY OF SAN RAFAEL - PLANNING DIVISION APPROVED w/ Conditions
'
;
j
• r---
1 r--.
14'-5" 7'-1"
(N) <$>
·············
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
~
. ··········· . . . . . ..
•.•.• .. •.• .. •.•.•.• .. •.•.•.• .. ·.·.·.~ ···.·.··.·.·.·.· . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .....
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . .

BAlH
(E) PRIMARY BEDROOM
"
· ,:..;.........:
• '
[3
---::. 1)0 I I (E) BAlH
-
/ '
r,: (E) LINEN r--"i t .:::J,: ==========i•C:.J
(E) CL (E) HALL
CL
(E) BEDROOM (E) BEDROOM
PRO\oiSIONS FO
CL
12'-10" 11'-1"
"' N
G
1£VATOR
CL
7'
"'
,------
ill
DECK 0
ill
a:, 0
-
0 ill
OJ
5 (E) CL
(E) KITCHEN
-[I
(E) HALL
g'
(N) FOYER/
@
(N)
(N) PORCH
-
..
= ·:·.

F
<B>
[2j
l
2'-7"
9'-4"

PROPOSED MAIN HOUSE FLOOR PLAN
SC.ALE 1/4" = I'
J
'
15'-5"
®
.
. ' .. I
DINING

DOOR SCHEDULE

TAG I SIZE I TYPE I MODEL I REMARKS
@j) 3' -Q" X 6' -8" HINGED SOLID WOOD OR FlBER GLASS
@ 2°-6" X 6'-8" HINGED SOLID WOOD OR FlBER GLASS
® 2°-6" X 6'-8" BIFOLD SOLID WOOD OR FlBER GLASS
@) 2'-8" X 6' -8" HINGED SOLID WOOD OR FlBER GLASS
@ 3' -Q" X 6' -8" HINGED SOLID WOOD OR FlBER GLASS
8'-8" l '

WINDOW SCHEDULE
SEE TIPICAI. CONSlRUCTION NOlES FOR ADDITIONAL YIINDOW INFORMATION (E) LIVING
TAG SIZE TYPE MANUF. MODEL REMARKS WxH
0 6'x3' SLIDING - - VlNYL OR FlBER GLASS
3'x3' SLIDING - - VINYL OR FIBER GLASS
<$> 8'x4' SLIDING - - VlNYL OR FlBER GLASS
61 x4' SLIDING - - VlNYL OR FlBER GLASS
0 1 o'x5' SLIDING - - VlNYL OR FlBER GLASS
.......... <€> 4'x3' SLIDING - - VlNYL OR FlBER GLASS
<B> 40"X24" SLIDING - - VlNYL OR FlBER GLASS
...
<B> 40"X60" SLIDING - - VlNYL OR FlBER GLASS
(lf) 0 3'X4' SLIDING - - VlNYL OR FlBER GLASS 0 3'X5' CASEMENT - - VlNYL OR FlBER GLASS <B> 2'X5' CASEMENT - - VlNYL OR FlBER GLASS
12·-11· 2'-7"
18' -1"
I FOR NEW \\1NDOWS U.F. SHGC

PROPOSED

ELECTRICAL LEGEND
0 DUPLEX OUTLET 0 DUPLEX OUTLET W/ GROUND FAULT
SWITCH
\ ,,,.- WIRING
-¢- CEILING/PENDANT LIGHT
(5) FAN WllH LIGHT

RECESS LIGHT
I. EL.Et,l'RIUL ITI:M5 511/N/N !Of:MATii; 1W Tl1:

FLOOR
IN5r IU.ATJ(;N 61111.L llE R1:V1:'M:P f!>Y Tl1: IU.DINE':> IN6f'EC.Ti:R IN Tl1: FIELD.

IU. tllJll..Ef !:f'ACINE':>, 'E't'I' ~IREM:NT5, PAN:!.. L..OUruN5 1W L.OID Dl:MAi'D5 6HIU. M:l:r Pl:RTAININE'>/\,alt.. U're ~5.

JIEW MINM.M kW 1M' !cRVltE 6HIU. llE IN5f lU. Fi:R Tl1: JIEW Ka£/SORY 17MilN:> F1:R tfC. 202.2.

PLAN ADITION
0 u
N
0 L
0 L
0 &f::j~
+--'
u
Q)
:r:

Q)
L a~

C I CJ)
en
Q)
0 Q)
L >0 <(O) Q) -.:IC ~O)
$'. w -
0 -c
-........._
>u
+--' >-_J
C WW
0 _J<( _J LL u <(<( > 0:::

Q_ Q_ ~z
<( I"')<( ~lf)
A-4
DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 03.15.24 CITY OF SAN RAFAEL - PLANNING DIVISION APPROVED w/ Conditions
' 0,
I
N
-
EXISTING TYPICAL MATERIALS:

ROOF: COMPOSITION A SHINGLES
SIDING: WOOD SHINGLES AND STUCCO
WINDOWS: VINYL DUAL-PANE GLASS
EXTERIOR TRIM FOR WINDOWS: 4" WOOD TRIM
111111111111111111
..................
111111111
............

II I I
,-----
I

I II I II II II
ij
I
I
I

I I I I I
111111111111111111
•••••••••••••••••••
11 I I I
I I
D
DD
II 11111111111
11111111111

EXISTING FRONT ELEVATION (SOUTH)
%.ALE I/ 4" = I'
[D
------
!DD

EXISTING REAR ELEVATION (NORTH)
%.ALE I/ 4" = I'
111111111
11111111111
' "' I
N
N
' "' I
N
-
' "' I
N
N
' "' I
N
-

EXISTING RIGHT ELEVATION (EAST)
%.ALE: I/ 4" = I'

II II II II II II II

EXISTING LEFT ELEVATION (WEST)
%.ALE: I/ 4" = I'

EXISTING ELEVATIONS
0 u
N
0 L
0 L
0 &f::j~
+--'
u
Q)
:r:
. . a~ L Q)

C I CJ)
en
Q)
0 Q)
L >0 <(O) Q) -.:IC ~O)
$'. w
-
0 -c
-........._
>u
+--' >-_J
C WW
0 _J<( _J LL u <(<(
I > 0::: Q_
Q_ I ~z
<( I I"')<( ~lf)
A-5
NEW DECK DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 03.15.24 CITY OF SAN RAFAEL - PLANNING DIVISION APPROVED w/ Conditions
"-l!.i:r:[,!l,rnlt,w
I
-
;::-i
' <O
I
;,,
'·
'.
'•
DD
I
·· ..
11 I I
: '
'
''
' II
II 11
A
II
II I
' II 11 I I ' " 111 11 1111 11 111 11 I 11 I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I 11
I I I
II 11 11 I I 11 I I II 11 11 I I II I I
'
--
-
-
-
-
-
·
- -
, y --..
),/'
'-·. ,·.
'' ' ' I I I, I , I I I I I , I I I '' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '' ' ' , I , I , I , I , I , I, I , '' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '' ' ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I '' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '' ' ' I I I I I I I I , I I I I I I '' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '' ' ' I I I, I I I I I I I I I I I '' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '' ' ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I '' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '' ' ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I '' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '' ' ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I '' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' " ' " " ' I 1111 II 111 II 111 II 1111 I •• : .. . '
I
'
I I
I I

I I I I
11 I I 1111 1111 1111 1111 11 I I 11 I I
...
- ·:-.

I
I

PROPOSED FRONT ELEVATION (SOUTH)
%ALE: I/ 4" = I'

I , , I I , I , I , I , I , I , I , I I , I
----- '

I I I I I I I I I I '
.,
I ..
:, - -~
' I:, ,., '
I
I
"'--1, , I, I, I, I, I, I, I, '' '
•• i"'--...._
' ' ' " ' II 1111 II 1111 II 1111
, ....
'.'·
.: ...
.1 Ji1' 1 iilli 11
l J
.-l ~ l l l
11 11 111 II 1111 II 111
I 11 II 11 11 11 I
' ' ' '
'
I
.
'
I
I
I
I
1 II I
I
' " ' II 1111 II I
[I]
I I
-
,, .. -· ,' > '.
[I]
.... ' .
' ''
I
"

PROPOSED REAR ELEVATION (NORTH)
%ALE: I/ 4" = I'
' ' ' ' ' '' ' ' ' ' ' '' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
-
.. -·
' '' ' '
' ' '
' '' ' '
, I I I '

I I I I
' ' '
.. ·'•
·. _-, ·.
12-
~5

I , I, I , I , I
' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
, I , I , I , I , I , I , I , I
'
'
' '
'
·_·,.

I
';,,
I
<O
's;[ I >-I I I,,'
'[-..,
I
;,,
N
PROPOSED TYPICAL MATERIALS (MATCH EXISTING):

ROOF: COMPOSITION A SHINGLES
SIDING: WOOD SHINGLES AND STUCCO
WINDOWS: VINYL DUAL-PANE GLASS
EXTERIOR TRIM FOR WINDOWS: 4" WOOD TRIM

PROPOSED ELEVATIONS
0 u
N
0 L
0 L
0 &f::j~
+-'
u
Q)
:r:

Q)
L a~
C I CJ) 0
en ..----
Q) LO
0 Q)
L >0 <(O) Q) -.:IC ~O)
$'. w
0 -c
-.......__
>u
+-' >-_J
C WW
0 _J<( _J LL
u <(<( > 0:::

Q_ Q_ ~z
<( I"')<( ~lf)
A-6
DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 03.15.24 CITY OF SAN RAFAEL - PLANNING DIVISION APPROVED w/ Conditions
- k--
-
I "'

I I I I I I I I
' ' ' ' I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I ' ' ' '
' ' ' '
• <O
I
<D
-
i
I
' '
'
'
'
' ' '
_ ' ,
I

12. 5[;?"
.A
- '
' '
-
12 ? i::::-:;_,
'
-
-
___
-
'
--
' -= ' ' ' ' ' ' ' , I , I , I , I
' ' ' ' ' ' I , I , I , I , I ,
' ' ' ' ' '
I ·• ..
- -
- " I I 11 II - - 11 -.- 11 I
I "' " ' ' '
..
.,
I '
- '
--
,.
' "
"
-
.,,
--
- I II I
' --

PROPOSED RIGHT ELEVATION (EAST)
%ALE I/ 4" = I'
, I , I I I I I I I I I I I 1 '' '' '
I , I , I , I I I I I I I ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' I I I I I I ' ' '' '' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '' , I , I , I , I I I I I I I I I I I 1 '' '' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
I
•, ... • \-' 11 11 11 I
I ~II~ -, ,____, ,: n
L
I . . I , , I , I , I , , , I , I , , 11
' ' I I I I I I I I I '

I I I I I I I I I I I I ' ' I
- - ' I , I , I , I , I , I , I , I , I , I I , , I I I! ! I [ ' ' I I I I I I I ! ! ' ' ••.· _,. ...
. .-· .. : .

L---,--:r""'r"7"""'"'.""'r"_-:- _ ,rc,-""'r"C"""C""""'." __ ..,. _ ,- -:---'"."'.""""7""""~--.-:~ •. 7"" ,_ 7=. --:- , . --:-__ ,--:- _ ,- '.""7".".;'.'"'.""7"".:-:,-'." __ • -_--:--::: -·--.-:---,- .. -:"7""777'.":'"'."':'.":'1:::::1'7:-"'7"""' :- :< - .,, :·.,.. ·. . i·'·,
1,:
..,._.
'.,;,,
-,."
-. ' ' .. - ._ .....
1<< •. -, _,.; .
• ·- -
. . ,, .. ' •, ....
·' ,:>·-:.-.··· "_._-"

PROPOSED LEFT ELEVATION (WEST)
%ALE I/ 4" = I'
I
-
.
---
-
"
-
-
- -
11 '
' ' ' ' ' '
' ' ' ' ' ' '
'
I
"
' , I , I , I , I I I I I , ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' 12 ' I , I , I , I , I , I , I , I , ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' --<c:::],, ' , I , I , I I I I I I I I I I I ' '' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' I , I , I , I I I , I I I I I I ' '' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' , I , I , I , I I I I I , I I I ' '' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' .,· '
'
--
" ' -
'
.•, .
--
-
-- , . .'
-
I
' ' ' ' ' '
-'
-,
--

I I I I I I I

I I I I
-- :
-

I I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I
' '' ' ' ' '
'

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I
' '·· •
.......

II I II II
11 I
11 I
I II '"
-~·.
..
"
-
-

I I I I '

I I I I I I I I I I I
' ' '
'
I
I
I
"
--
I
7 " "
• <O
I
<O
PROPOSED TYPICAL MATERIALS (MATCH EXISTING):

ROOF: COMPOSITION A SHINGLES
SIDING: WOOD SHINGLES AND STUCCO
WINDOWS: VINYL DUAL-PANE GLASS
EXTIERIOR TRIM FOR WINDOWS: 4" WOOD TRIM

PROPOSED
0 u
N
0 L
0 L
0 &f::j~
+-'
u
Q)
:r:

Q)
L a~
C I CJ) 0
en ..----
Q) LO
0 Q)
L >0 <(O) Q) "SIC ~O)
$'. w
0 -c
'-....,_ >u
+-' >- __J
C WW
0 __J <( __J LL
u <(<( > 0:::

Q_ Q_ ~z
<( I"')<( ~lf)
A-7

ELEVATIONS
WATER EFFICIENT PLUMBING FIXTURES WINDOWS REQUIREMENTS M.E.P. GENERAL NOTES DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 03.15.24 CITY OF SAN RAFAEL - PLANNING DIVISION APPROVED w/ Conditions

PLAN NOTES
(D SAFETY (TEMPERED) GLAZING: at: (1) hazardous locations-windows adjacent to: tubs showers, and tub/showers (2) adjacent lo and within 24 inches of either edge of doors (3) glazin_q less than 60" above walking surface at stairways or landing.s (4) windows within 5' horiz. from tub/shower unless btm ol glazing >60" abv. standing surface of tub/shower. a) SHOWER/TUB:• showerhead 1.8 gal. per min. max. a. shower stalls shall be a minimum fimshea interior of 1 1 024 square inches, be capable of encompassing a 30" diameter circle, and any doors shal swing out of the enclosure have a clear opening of 22" minimum. (cpc 411.6 and 411.7) ®
(j)
b. glazing in any portion of the shower, bathtub, or hydro-massage tub enclosure shall be safety glazing (1.e. temQered glass) when the bottom edge of the glazing is less than 50" above fhe standing surface oflhe unit. (cbc 2406.3 and ere r308.4) c. shower stalls and bathtubs with shower heads installed, shall have walls finished with a non-absorbent surface for a minimum of 6' above the floor. d. any new or replaced mixing valve in a shower (including over a tub) shall be pressure balancing set at a maximum f20° f. any new or replaced water-filler valve in bathtubslwhirlpools shall have a temperature limiting device set at a maximum of 120° e. the water heater thermostat cannot be used to meefthe these provisions. (cpc 414.0 and 418.0) f. hydro-massage tubs (i.e.1·acuzzi tubs) shall have motor access, a gfci protected dedicated circuit, and be ul isled. all metal cables, fittingsLpiping, or other metal surfaces, within 5' of the inside wall of the hyrdo-massage tub shall oe properly bonded. hydro-massage tubs shall be bonded g.materials used as backers for wall tile in tub and shower areas and wall panels inshower areas shall be glass mat gypsum panel, fiber-reinforced gypsum panels,non-asbestos fiber-cement backer board, or non-asbeslos fiber-cement reinforced cementitious backer units installed in accordance with manufacturers' recommendations. [r702.4.2] h.water-resistant gyRsum board shall not be installed over a class i or ii vaporretarder in a shower or tub compartment. [r702.3.7] waler resistant gypsumbacking board shall not be used where there will be direct exposure to water, or inareas subject to continuous hign humidity. [r702.3.7.1] TOILET: max.1.28_gal. per flush; min. 30" width clearance; min 24" front clearance; fixture centered min 15" from side; caulk & seal fixture where It meets floor.

BATHROOM:
a. all receptacles shall be gfci protected & tamQer resistant. new/additional outlets shall have a dedicated 20-amp circuit. (cec 406.11, 210.8, 210.11) b. provide energy star com3Iiant mechanical ventilation system capable of providing 5 air changes/hr-mechanical 5 cfm minimum; exhaust fans are required in all bathrooms, even 1f an operable window is installed. exhaust fans and lighting shall have separate control switches (even if a combination unit is installed). the exhaust fan may need to be supplied by a gfi protected circuit based on the manufacturer's requirements, and shall be control with an accesible humidistat ( CGBSC Section 4.506.1) c. termination of all environmental air ducts shall be a minimum of 3 feet from property lines or openings into the building (i.e. drye~ bath and utility fans etc. must be 3 feet away from doors, windows, opening sl<yfights or auic vents) with dampers. d. lighting fixtures located within 3' horizontally and 8' vertically of the bathtub rim or shower slall threshold shall be listed for a damp location, or listed for wet locations where subject to shower spray. (cec 410.10) e. Lighting shall be high efficiency fixtures (e.g. fluorescent, led). At least one luminaire shalrbe controlled wifh an occupant sensor with controls that do not allow the fixtures to be automatically turned on or allow the fixture to be always on f. maximum flow for bathroom faucet to be 1.20 gallon/minute g.materials used as backers for wall tile in tub and shower areas and wall panels inshower areas shall be glass mat gypsum panel, fiber-reinforced gypsum panels.non-asbestos fiber-cement backer board, or non-asbeslos fiber-cement reinforced cementitious liacker units installed in accordance with manufacturers' recommendations. [r702.4.2] h.water-resistant gyRsum board shall not be installed over a class i or ii vaporretarder in a shower or tub compartment. [r702.3.7] water resistant gypsumbacking board shall not be used where there will be direct exposure to water, or inareas subject to continuous hign humidity. [r702.3.7.1] KITCHEN:
a. conductor wires with an installed neutral and a four-prong outlet are required for dryers and cooking units. b. provide two separate 20amp circuits for kitchen small appliances, with no other outlets on the circuits. c. termination of all environmental air ducts shall be a minimum of 3 feet from property lines or openings into the building (i.e. dryers1 bath and utility fans etc. must be 3 feet away from doors, windows, opening slfyfights or aliic vents) d. kitchen lighting: all permanently installed lighting shall be high efficacy. e. installation instuctions for all listed equipment shall be provided to the field inspector at time of inspection. f. gfci protection at all receptacles serving kitchen counter tops; receptacles within 6 feet of a wet bar sink; at each kitchen and dining area counter space wider than 12 inches. locate so that no point along the counter wall is over 24" from a receptacle. all receptacles to be tamper resistant g. maximum flow for kitchen faucet to be 1.8 gallon/minute Ii. all under cabinet lighting must be switched separately from other lighting in the home. i.electric range in a dwelling under 750 square feet, the hood capacity must be 160 elm, or a 65 % capture efficiency. the _gas-powered range hood in a dwelling under 750 square feet, the hood capacity must be 280 elm, or an 85 % capture efficiency (ce). [cenc table150.0-g, cenc 150.0(o)g.1] LAUNDRY:
a. conductor wires with an installed neutral and a four-prong outlet are required for dryers and cooking units. b. provide one minimum seperate 20 amp circuit to laundry appliances. c. vent dryer w/smooth metal duct to ext. w/backdraft damper. duct to be 4" min. dia.; 14' max length w/2 elbows provide one minimum seperate 20 amp circuit to laundry appliances. d. termination of all environmental air aucts shall be a minimum of 3 feet from property lines or openings into the building (i.e. dryers, bath and utility fans etc. must be 3 feet away from doors, windows, opening sl<vfights or attic vents) e. laundry room lighting: all flglits shall be fluorescent or controlled by an occuP.ant sensor. f. installation instuctions for all listed equipment shall be provided to the field inspector at time of inspection. g. provide a 220 volt gfi electrical receptacle
h. where a closet is designed for the installation of clothes dryer, an opening of not less than 100 square inches for makeup air shall be provided in the door.

GUARD RAILS: ~uardrail req'd at walking surface 30" or more above grade. guardrail height shall be min. 42 high with intermediate rails such that 4" s11here shalrnot pass through. guardrail & connection shall be capable of resisting 20 Qlf horiz. load perpendicular to top rail and intermediate rails, panel filters and their connections shall be capable of withstanding a load of at least 25 P.0unds per square foot applied horizontally at right angles ofver the entire tributary area, including openings and spaces between rails. @ STAIRS: conform to
at 1¼"-2t"hdiameter handrai~ mounted 34Jo 38in. above the tread nosing. required at all s airs wI 4 or more risers -return al en s b. handrails shall be moun ed so that the completed rail and supporting structure are caP.able of withstanding a load of at least 200 pounds applied in any direction at any point on the rail. cbc-table 16-b, foot note 9.
c. headroom min. 6'8" abv stair treads
d. handrail projection max. 3.5" into req'd stair width. stringers and other projections are limited to 1-1/2" projection each side. e. rise & run of stairs (max. rise 7-3/4"; min. run 10") f. handrail required at stairs with two or more riser~ handrail both sides required at ext stairs; handrail at one side alloweo at int. stairs g. at ext. stairs; handrails to extend 12" horiz at top and extend one tread length at bottom of run & return to adj. wall or post ® LANDINGS: Provide 36" deep landing outside all exterior doors (not more than 7-3/4" lower than threshold for in-swinging_ doors and not more than 1/2" lower than threshold for outswinging doors; min. 1/4" slopelor weather exposed landings; balconies and roof decks sealed uncferneath @ STORAGE UNDER STAIRS: Provide i" type x gyp bd under stairs at storage area, typ. @ PRESSURE TREATED WOOD: to be used for wood in contact w/earth or embedded in concrete or masonry. 6" min. clear from grade to framing HOSE BIBS: provide a non-removable backflow prevention device on all new exterior hose bibs, and lawn sprinkler/irrigation systems. All hose bibs must have approved anti-siphon device SLOPE OF GRADE: The grade shall fall a minimum of 6 inches within the first 10 feet (5%).where lot lines prohibit 6" of fall within 10', drains or swales shall be constructed to ensure drainage away from the structure. f1A\ WATERPROOF/GFCI PROTECTED OUTLETS: at exterior at front and rear of dwelling having access to grade and at all balconies; decks; and porches greater than 20 SF ADDRESS NUMBERS: Show location of address numbers on building elevations clearly visible from adjacent access street or road. numbers to be min. 4" high with min. stroke with of 1 /2" and shall contrast with the background WATER HEATER: ( qas storaqe-tank type)
a. seismic anchorage of Wl\ter heater il'lclude 3 anCHoi'l! or straps at points within the to upper and lower one-third of its vertical dimension-the lower anchor/strap located to maintain a minimum distance of 4 inches above the controls b. pressure relief valve with drain a minimum distance of 4 inches above the controls c provide 24 inch minimum wide door to water heater compartment; min 30" x 30" workspace by firebox d. dwti location prohibited in bdrm; bathnm; clothes els!; or area open to same except direct vent appliance e. if located over framing; requires watertight pan w/1" drain f. externally wrapped wifh min. R-12 insulation @) 1-HR WALL BETWEEN GARAGE & LIVING SPACE: 5/8" type x gyp. bd garage side; 2x6 wd studs@ 16" o.c. w/R-19 bait insul; 1/2" gyp bd @house side. 1-hr clg ptween Qarage & house: 2 layers i" type X gyp. bd. garage side (fasten per CBC Table 7-C item 21-l.1j Fire separa ion shall extend through ceiling to the underside of roof sheathing. @ DOOR TO GARAGE: door between garage & house to be self-closing; tight-fitting solid wood door 1-3/8" thick or approved 20 min. fire-rated door CRAWLSPACE VENTILATION: vent 1 s.f./150 s.f. of underfloor area: U.O.N., provide painted 6"x16" G.S.M. vents as close to corners as possible and allowing cross-ventilation.

Vents shall be covered with¼" wire mesh
@ UNDER-FLOOR CLEARANCE: provide min. 18" clear to exposed ground in crawlspaces from joists or structural wood floors or 12" to wood girders. Otlierwise, such wood framing shan be pressure-treated or have natural resistance to decay. @ CRAWLSPACE ACCESS: Provide min. 18"x24" crawlspace access panel. Ventilation 1 s.f./150 s.f. of crawl space area. @ ATTIC VENTILATION: vent 1 s.f./150 s.f. of attic area or 1 s.f./300 s.f. if >50% of venting is located above mid-point of attic per 2022 CRC.

ATTIC ACCESS PANEL: R807.1: 22"x30" min. panel (size lar_ger to accomodate fau as req'd) located in hallway or other readily accessible location. if FAD in attic, provide 30" min deep platform in front of firebox & lighting outlet switched at access door near furnace.

EGRESS WINDOW: 5.7 sq. fl. min. (5 sq. ft. min. allowable at ground level); 20" wide by 24" high; max. 44" to finished sill' opens directly to public way; yard or court tliat opens to a public way 1'i?, ARC-FAULT CIRCUIT INTERRUPTER: at all branch circuits that supply 120 V2:!J volt, single-phase, 15 and 20 ampere receptacle outlets installed in all dwelling unit rooms and kitcliens, except bathrooms and garages. CEC 210.12 SMOKE DETECTORS: new 110v smoke detectors (with batteiy backup) which are audible in all sleeping areas & at the following locations: 1. hallways leading to bedrooms; 2. above tops of stairs; 3. at least one every level and any area wllere ceiling height is more than 24" above hallway ceiling leading to sleeP.ing_ room. all smoke detectors are to be interconnectea per 2022 CRC R-314.4 (activation of one alarm will activate all of the alarms in the individual unit & alarm will be clearly audible in all bedrooms over background noise levels with all intervening doors closed) CARBON MONOXIDE ALARMS: (Sec:R315) new 110v carbon monoxide alanm (with battery backup) installed in each bedroom, and outside each area adjacent to a sleeping area; each story of the building; and in any basement FIRE STOPPING VENT TO BE PROVIDED, TYP. BRAND: brandguard or approved equal per r337.6 (see note #6 in fire high severity zone requirements section on sheet a5.1 ® CLOSETS: Lighting in clothes closet shall be fully glass enclosed or flourescent fixture.

EXTERIOR WALL GAPS: annular spaces around pipes, electric cables, conduits or openinings in sole/bottom plates at exterior walls shall be closed with cement morlar1 concrete masonry or a similar method acceptable to the enforcing agency to prevent passage o rodents. @ HOT WATER PIPING: Minimum 1" thick pipe insulation shall be installed on all accesible hot water piping.

OUTDOOR LIGHTING: Outdoor lighting permanently mounted to a dwelling or other buildings on the same parcel shall be high efficacy ancfbe controlled by onf of the following combinations:
a. photocell and motion sensor b. photocell and time switch c. astronomical lime clock
d. EMCS with features of astronomical lime clock, does not allow the luminarie to be ON during the day, and may be programmed to automatically turn lighting off at night.

INDOOR LIGHTING: Indoor lightin9 for new homes and remodels must be high efficacy. The definition of "high efficacy luminaires includes all light sources identified as "efficient" unaer the 2016 Standards. This includes linear flourescent; pin based compact fiourescent, GU-24 base CFL, HID, and induction. High efficacy products include any luminaire that contains a JAB-compliant lamp or otherlight source. In other words, any luminaire can ~ualigy as high efficacy as long as it meets wifh the requirements of Section 150.0(k) and Joint Appendix JAB. ® MEMBRANE PENETRATIONS: Membrane penetrations of fire-resistance assemblies shall comply with 2022 CBC section 714.3.2 Membrane penetrations of fire resistance rated assemblies shall be protected by and approv~d penetration firestop system. Exceptions. A. Membrane penetration of fire resistance rated walls by steel electrical boxes that do not exceed 16 square inches in area P.rovided that the aggregate area of the openings through the membrane does not exceed 100 square inches in any 100 square feet of wan area. such boxes on opposite sides of the wall shall be separated by on of the following: -By a horizontal distance of not less than 24" where the wall is constructed with individuar non communicating stud cavities. -By solid fireblocking -By protecting both boxes with approved listed putty pads. B. Membrane P.enetrations of fire resistance rated walls by listed electrical boxes provided that the boxes have been tested for use in fire resistance rated assemblies and are installed in accordance with the instruction included in the listing. Such boxes on opposite sides of the wall shall be separated by on of the following: -By the horizontal distance specified in the listing of the electrical boxes. -By solid fireblocking. -By protecting both boxes with listed putty pads.

HOUSE VENTILATION: The exhaust fan in the house are required to remain on all times the building is occupied but can have an overirde control like a typical manual wall switch to turn fan off when necessary with the following:
a.
b.

C.
d.
e.

Whole house fans shall have a maximum of 1.0 sane sound rating, with a minum 100 cfm. HVAC contractor to provide and calculate system requirements. On the wall above switch, a label is required that stares somellng like "ventilation control" or "Operate Exhaust Fan when home is occupied" Whole house fans shall have insulated louvers or covers which close when the fan is off. Covers or louvers shall have a minimum insulation value of R4.2.

Identify the exhaust or supply fans that are part of the mechanical ventilation system provides the appropriate ventilation rate. Ian switch shall have a label reading the following: "this switch controls the indoor air quality ventilation for the home. leave it on unless the ou!door air quality is very poor." @) MOISTURE BARRIER: Vapor retarder shall be a 6-mil polyethylene or approved vapor retarder with joints lal)ped not less than 6 incnes shall be praced between the concrete floor slab and P.repared 4 inch thick subgrade consisting of gravel, crushed stone or crushed concrete (ere r506.2.3). exception: subgrade is not required when the soil condition is of silty sand, sand-silt mixture (ere table r4'05.1 ). approvable methods:

1.icc esr#1413-redgard waterproofing and crack prevention membrane, ccure pro-red waterproofing membrane 963, cbp 232 waterproofing and antifracture membrane, ana jambo waterproofing membrane

2.icc esr #2417 - laticrete hydro ban

3.icc esr #2785 - polycoat-aquatight and flexideck

4. ice esr#3474 - mapelastic aquadefense waterproofing membrane @ HVAC CONDENSER:
a.where equipment or appliances that require service are located on a roof with a 4:12or steerer slope, a lever platfonm not less than 30"x30" must be provided at theservice side. [cmc 304.2 b.if in the attic, please note that a permanent 120-volt receptacle outlet and a lightingfixture shall be installed near the appliance. [cmc 304.4] c.if in the garage, please provide protection for the appliance or elevate the unit so it isout of the normal palh of vehicles. [cmc 305.1.1] d.if outdoors, a compressor or porlion of acondensing unit supported from the ground shall rest of a concrete or other approvedbase extending not less !nan 3 inches above the adjoining ground level. [cmc1105.2]
e.outdoor condensing units shall have a clearance of at least 5 feet from the outlet of any dryer vent. [cenc 150.0(h)3a]
@ GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT AT BATHROOMS:

At least one bathroom shall be provided with grab bar reinforcement for thewater closet, bathtub, and shower. Reinforcement shall be 2x8 nominal lumber. Reinforcement shall be located between 32" and 39-1/4" above the finished floor. Water closet reinforcement shall be installed on both side wallsof the fixture, or one side wall and the back wall. Where the water closet is not placed ad/"acent to a side wall capable of accommodating a grab bar, the bathroom shall have provisions for insta lation of floor-mounted,foldaway or similar alternate grab bar reinforcements. Shower reinforcement shall be continuous where wall framing is 11rovided. Bathtub and combination bathtub/shower reinforcement shall be continuous on each end of the bathtub and the back wall. Additionallyhback wall reinforcement for a lower grab bar shall be provided with the bottom edge located no more t an 6" above the bathtub rim. (crcr327.1.1)

EMERGENCY ESCAPE 'MNPOWS

IN BEDROOMS PROVIDE OPERABLE ESCAPE WINDOWS (AT LEAST ONE IN EACH BEDROOM) MEETING ALL OF lHE FOLLOWING:

A NET CLEAR OPENABLE AREA NOT LESS lHAN 5.7 SF A MINIMUM CLEAR OPENING HEIGHT OF 24".

A MINIMUM CLEAR OPENING WIDlH OF 20"
A SILL HEIGHT NOT OVER 44" ABOVE lHE FLOOR.

NAJURAL LIGHT AND VENTILATION REQUIREMENTS
EACH HABITABLE ROOM (EXCLUDES HALLWAYS, BAlHROOMS, AND LAUNDRY ROOMS) IS REQUIRED TO HAVE:

NA lURAL LIGHT (WINDOWS OR SKYLIGHTS) SIZED TO A MINIMUM OF 8% OF lHE FLOOR AREA OF lHE ROOM
VENTILATION (OPENABLE PORTION OF WINDOW OR SKYLIGHT) SIZED TO A MINIMUM OF 4% OF lHE FLOOR AREA.

SAFETY GLAZING-WINDOWS
GLAZING LESS 11-IAN 60" ABOVE 11-IE DRAIN INLET IN HOT TUBS, WHIRLPOOLS, SAUNAS, SlEAM ROOMS, BA 11-ITUBS AND SHOWERS SHALL BE lEMPERED.

GLAZING IN FIXED OR OPENABLE PANELS ADJACENT TO A DOOR, WHERE 11-IE NEAREST EXPOSED EDGE OF 11-IE GLAZING IN WITI-IIN A 24" ARC OF EITI-IER VERTICAL EDGE OF 11-IE DOOR IN A CLOSED POSITION AND WHERE 11-IE BOTTOM EXPOSED EDGE IS LESS 11-IAN 60" ABOVE 11-IE WALKING SURFACE, SHALL BE lEMPERED.

GLAZING IN WAL.LS ENCLOSING STAIRWAY LANDINGS OR WITI-IIN 5 FEET OF 11-IE BOTTOM AND TOP STAIRWAYS WHERE 11-IE BOTTOM EDGE OF 11-IE GLASS IS LESS 11-IAN 60" ABOVE A WALKING SURFACE SHALL lEMPERED.

GLAZING IN INDIVIDUAL FIXED OR OPERABLE WINDOWS SHALL BE SAFETY TYPE IF 11-IE WINDOW IN QUESTION MEETS ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDmONS:
- 11-IE EXPOSED AREA OF 11-IE INDMDUAL PANE IS GREATER THAN 9 SQUARE FEET. - 11-IE EXPOSED BOTTOM EDGE IS LESS 11-IAN 18" ABOVE 11-IE FLOOR. - 11-IE EXPOSED TOP EDGE IS GREAlER THAN 36" ABOVE 11-IE FLOOR. - 11-IERE ARE ONE OR MORE WALKING SURFACES WITHIN 36" HORIZONTALLY OF 11-IE PLANE OF 11-IE GLAZING.

TYPE OF FIXTURE

WATER CLOSET
(TOILET)

SHOWERHEAD
FAUCET

BATHROOM

FAUCET KITCHEN
REQUIRED WATER-CONSERV1NG PLUMBING
FlXTURE (MAXIMUM FLOW-RATES)

1.28 GALLONS/FLUSH

1.8 GALLONS/MINUTE AT 8DPSI

1.2 GALLONS/MINUTE AT 60 PSI 1.8 GALLONS/MINUTE AT 60 PSI (AVERAGE)

1. ALL MECHANICAL AND ELEClRICAL WORK TO BE DESIGNED BUILD, INFORMATION PROVIDED FOR REFERENCE ONLY.

2. DUCT OPENINGS AND OlHER RELAlED AIR DISlRIBUTION COMPONENT OPENINGS SHALL BE COVERED DURING CONSlRUCTION

3. HVAC SYSlEM INSTALLERS SHALL BE lRAINED AND CERTIFIED IN lHE PROPER INSTALLATION OF HVAC SYSlEMS.

4. PROVIDE INSULATION FOR 11-IE HOT WAlER SUPPLY FROM lHE WATER HEAlER TO lHE KITCHEN FAUCET

5. PROVIDE GROUND-FAULT CIRCUIT INlERRUPTERS FOR RECEPTACLES INSTALLED AT BAlHROOM AND KITCHEN COUNlERTOP SURFACES.

6. AT 11-IE KITCHEN, PROVIDE 2-20 AMP CIRCUITS FOR SMALL APPLIANCES AND A 15 AMP DEDICAlED CIRCUIT FOR lHE REFRIGERATOR. INDEPENDENTLY, PROVIDE SEPARAlE CIRCUITS FOR LIGHTING, APPLIANCE RECEPTACLES, HOOD FANS, DISHWASHERS AND DISPOSALS.

7. ALL PERMANENTLY INSTALLED LU MIN AIRES IN KITCHENS SHALL BE HIGH EFFICACY LUMINAIRES, AS SPECIFIED IN §150.0(k)l

8. LIGHT FIXlURES RECESSED INTO INSULATED CEILINGS SHALL BE LISlED FOR ZERO CLEARANCE INSULATION CONTACT.

9. SMOKE DETECTORS SHALL BE INSTALLED IN EXISTING BEDROOMS, IN HALLWAYS, AND WllHIN EACH STORY. WHEN DWELLING HAS FUEL-BURNING APPLIANCES OR ATTACHED GARAGE: INSTALL CARBON MONOXIDE ALARM IN HALLWAYS ADJOINING SLEEPING AREAS AT EACH LEVEL. SMOKE DElECTORS AND CARBON MONOXIDE ALARMS SHALL RECEIVE lHEIR PRIMARY POWER FROM lHE BUILDING WIRING AND BATTERY BACKUP.

10. ALL PERMANENTLY INSTALLED LU MIN AIRES IN BATI-IROOM SHALL BE HIGH EmCACY LUMINAIRES, AS SPECIFIED IN §150.0(k)1

11. BAlHROOM RECEPTACLES SHALL BE INSTALLED ON A DEDICAlED 20-AMPERE BRANCH CIRCUIT lHAT IS:
- DEDICATED TO ONLY BATI-IROOM RECEPTACLES OR, - DEDICATED TO lHE RECEPTACLES AND LIGHTING WllHIN A SINGLE BAlHROOM ONLY.

12. SURFACE MOUNlED LIGHTING FIXlURES IN CLOSETS SHALL BE 18" FROM STORAGE AREAS. FLUSH MOUNTED SHALL BE 6" AWAY.

13. ALL RECEPTACLES, LIGHTING CIRCUITS, SWITCHES AND HARD WIRED SMOKE DElECTORS INSTALLED IN ROOMS OlHER lHAN KITCHEN, SHALL BE PROTEClED WllH AN ARC FAULT CIRCUIT INlERRUPTER.

14. ALL RECEPTACLES SHALL BE TAMPER RESISTANCE IN ACCORDANCE TO 2022 CEC 15. EXHAUST FANS Will-I INlEGRAL LIGHTING SYSlEM SHALL BE SWITCHES SEPARATELY FROM LIGHTING SYSTEM OR HA VE A LIGHTING SYSlEM lHAT CAN BE MANUALLY lURNED ON AND OFF WHILE ALLOWING lHE FAN TO CONTINUE TO OPERAlE FOR AN EXTENDED PERIOD OF TIME. LIGHTING INlEGRAL TO AN EXHAUST FAN MUST BE HIGH-EFFICACY.

16. EACH BAlHROOM IS REQUIRED TO HAVE A 50 CFM MINIMUM EXHAUST FAN DUClED TO lHE OUTSIDE. BAlHROOM IS ANY ROOM WllH A BAlHlUB, SHOWER, SPA OR SIMILAR SOURCES OF MOISTURE. TOILET ROOM IS NOT CONSIDERED A BAlHROOM.

17. NOT USED

18. LOCAL EXHAUST FANS ARE REQUIRED TO BE RAlED FOR SOUND AT A MAXIMUM OF 3 SONES, UNLESS lHEIR MAXIMUM RAlED AIRFLOW EXCEEDS 400 CFM.

19. PROVIDE ONE 20A DEDICATED CIRCUIT FOR lHE RECEPTACLE OUTLETS FOR lHE LAUNDRY ROOM. lHE 20A LAUNDRY ROOM RECEPTACLE CIRCUIT CAN SUPPLY MORE lHAN ONE RECEPTACLE IN lHE LAUNDRY ROOM. lHIS RECEPTACLE CAN NOT SUPPLY OlHER OUTLETS, SUCH AS lHE LAUNDRY ROOM LIGHTING OR RECEPTACLES IN OlHER ROOMS. GFCI PROlECTION IS NOT REQUIRED FOR 15A AND 20A, 125V RECEPTACLES IN A LAUNDRY ROOM, UNLESS lHEY ARE wtlHIN 6 FT OF A SINK.

20. EXHAUST DUCTS FOR DRYER SHALL 1ERMINA1E ON lHE OUTSIDE OF lHE BUILDING AND NOT LESS lHAN 3 FEET IN ANY DIRECTION FROM OPENINGS INTO BUILDINGS. DUCT lERMINATION SHALL BE EQUIPED Will-I A BACKDRAFT DAMPER

21. LIGHTING CONlROL FOR KITCHEN, DINING, FAMILY, LIVING, AND BEDROOMS SHALL BE ON DIMMERS.

22. LIGHTING CONlROL FOR GARAGE, LAUNDRY, BAlHROOMS, AND STORAGE SHALL BE ON VACANCY SENSORS.

23. EXlERIOR LIGHTS SHALL BE ON TIMERS OR PHOTO SENSORS. 24. GFI RECEPTACLE FOR EACH PARKING SPACE.

25. PROVIDE EARlHQUAKE SHUTOFF VALVE

26. ALL LIGHTS lHROUGHOUT lHE RESIDENCE, INCLUDING lHE GARAGE AND EXlERIOR, SHALL BE HIGH EFFICACY.

27. LIGHTING IN ALL HABITABLE SPACES SHALL HAVE DIMMER CONlROLS (ENERGY CODE 150.0(K)2F)

28. ELEClRICAL RECEPTACLE OUTLETS, SWITCHES AND CONlROLS INlENDED TO BE USED BY OCCUPANTS, SHALL BE LOCATED NO MORE lHAN 48" MEASURED FROM lHE TOP OF lHE OUTLET BOX AND NOT LESS 11-IAN 15"MEASURED FROM lHE BOTTOM OF lHE OUTLET BOX ABOVE 11-IE FINISH FLOOR. (CRC 327.1.2)

29. AT 11-IE KITCHEN ISLAND, A MINIMUM OF ONE GFI/AFCI PROTEClED ELEClRICAL RECEPTACLE SHALL BE INSTALLED AT KITCHEN ISLAND COUNlERTOPS WllH A SURFACE AREA OF 9 SQUARE FEET OR LESS. FOR ISLAND COUNlER TOPS WllH AN AREA OF MORE 11-IAN 9 SQUARE FEET, AN ADDITIONAL ELEClRICAL RECEPTACLE SHALL BE INSTALLED FOR EVERY ADDITIONAL 18 SQUARE FEET OF COUNTERTOP SURFACE AREA. lWO ELEClRICAL RECEPTACLES ARE REQUIRED. (CEC 210.52(C)(2))

PLAN NOTES
0 u
N
0 L
0 L
0 &f::j~
+-'
u
Q)
:r:
. . a~ L Q)

C I CJ)
·-
en
Q)
0 Q)
L >0 <(O) Q) -.:IC ~O)
3::: w
-
0 -c
-........._
>u
+-' >-_J
C WW
0 _J<( _J LL u <(<( ·-- > 0:::

Q_ I Q_ I ~z
<( I I"")<( ~lf)
A-8
DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 03.15.24 <c- D <c- D <c- D 0 D <c- '""
I
DS •
I
t
<c- 0 Cl Cl Cl

DI DI DI
()
Q
DS

PROPOSED ROOF PLAN
SC-Al.£: I/ 4" = I'
I
"'
RIDGE OR VALJ.£Y
DIRECTION OF WAlER FLOW
DOWN SPOUT [!JDS
ROOF' LOU~ vans I I
e· x us·
ADU ATTIC VENTILATION CALCULATION ATTIC AREA TO BE VEN Tl LA TIED = 232 SF REQUIRED VENTILATION AREA = 1,815 SF / 150 SF = 12.10 SF PROVIDED ATTIC VENTILATION AREA:
- ROOF VENTS = (19) X 0.66 = 12.54
- GABLE VENT = (0) X 0.66 = 0.00
TOTAL = 12.54 SF
Tl-lEREFORE TOTAL PROVIDED VENTILATION AREA IS MORE THAN REQUIRED

ROOF PLAN
0 u
N
0 L
0 L
0 &f::j~
+-'
u
Q)
:r:
a~ L Q)

C I CJ)
en
Q)
0 Q)
L >0 <(O) Q) -.:IC ~O)
$'. w
-
0 -c
-........._
>u
+-' >-_J
C WW _J<( 0 _J LL u <(<( > 0:::

Q_ Q_ ~z
<( I"')<( ~lf)
A-9
& SECTIONS
Lisa Dal Gallo
Josh Sullivan
127 Valley View Ave.

San Rafael, CA 94901
City of San Rafael
Planning Commission
1400 510 Ave., Suite 209
San Rafael, CA 94901
Dear Planning Commission:

We write to formally appeal the City of San Rafael's approval of the reasonable accommodation request relating to planned construction at 131 Valley View Avenue and attach a copy of Associate Planner Renee Nickenig's October 17 letter approving the request.

We disagree with the City's determination that the reasonable accommodation request provides our neighbors with equal access to housing under the Federal Fair Housing Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act and disagree that the factors set forth in San Rafael Municipal Code Section 14.26.060 support grating the reasonable accommodation request.

Consequently we request the Planning Commission hear our appeal at its next public meeting.

October 17, 2024
Habibolah Hastaie & Carol Underwood
131 Valley View Ave
San Rafael, CA 94901
Via Email:

Re: PLAN23-151 -Administrative Action to Approve Project; 131 Valley View (APN: 010-081-18)
To Habibolah Hastaie & Carol Underwood:

The City of San Rafael has received the re-submittal of your application for several improvements to the existing residence at 131 Valley View Avenue. The application includes additions at the front and rear of the residence, which as shown would require an exception to the hillside property development standards pursuant San Rafael Municipal Code (SRMC) Section 14.12.040, but have requested to be waived as a request for reasonable accommodation pursuant to SRMC Chapter

14.26. This letter is to advise you that staff has approved the project based on the findings and subject to the conditions outlined in the attached document.

Please note that this action is subject to subject to a five working day appeal period, pursuant to SRMC Chapter 14.28, which expires on Thursday, October 24, 2024 at 5:00 pm. Additionally, project conditions of approval must be satisfied with construction permits and/or other required approvals or actions to implement the project.

Should you have any immediate questions please do not hesitate to contact me at (415) 485-3397 or [email protected].

Sincerely,
Renee Nickenig, Associate Planner

CITY OF SAN RAFAEL

ATTACHMENTS

1. Findings and Conditions

2. Project Plans
cc: Application Address File
CITY OF SAN RAFAEL : 1400 FIFTH AVENUE, SAN RAFAEL, CALIFORNIA 94901 : CITYOFSANRAFAEL.ORG Kate Colin, Mayor• Maribeth Bushey, Vice Mayor• Rachel Kertz, Councilmember • Maika Llorens Gulati, Councilmember • Eli Hill, Councilmember Address:

Request for Reasonable Accommodation
Project No. RA24-001 (PLAN23-151)
roved: Yes Effective Date: 10/25/2024
Signature: ~ J 10/17/2024
Project Description
A Reasonable Accommodation request has been submitted pursuant to San Rafael Municipal Code (SRMC) Section 14.26.060 to accommodate the proposed project. This permit supplants other discretionary land use permits, including a Major Environmental and Design Review and Hillside Exception, pursuant to SRMC Section 14.12.040.

The proposed project includes:

1. the enclosure and expansion of the front porch;

2. the addition of a bay window at the front of the residence; the enclosure of an existing covered porch at the east;

3. the expansion of the bedroom at the northwest (rear) of the residence; and

4. the expansion of the existing dining room at the southwest (rear) of the residence.

The project plans submitted also include an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU). The ADU will be reviewed as a ministerial permit and not as part of the Reasonable Accommodation request.

Staff notes that the project is not compliant with San Rafael Municipal Code (SRMC) Section

14.12.030, as the additions at the northeast and east of the residence will encroach into the required setbacks and the overall project will result in additional development on a visually significant ridgeline. However, a Reasonable Accommodation request has been submitted proposing an exception to these standards, subject to the findings listed below.

C:EQA Finding
Yes No
The project is categorically X The project has been determined to be exempt from exempt from the provisions of he provisions of CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines the California Environmental Section 15303 - New Construction or Conversion of Quality Act (CEQA) and none Small Structures.
of the exceptions of Section
15300.2 apply.

Request for Reasonable Accommodation Findings (SRMC §14.26.060) Yes No
Findings. The written decision to grant or deny a request for reasonable accommodation shall be consistent with the Acts and shall be based on consideration of the following factors:

1. Whether the housing,
which is the subject of the
request, will be used by an
individual with a disability
under the Acts;

2. Whether the request for
reasonable accommodation
is necessary to make
specific housing available to
an individual with a disability
under the Acts;

3. Whether there is an
alternative accommodation
which may provide an
equivalent level of benefit;
X The applicant has provided documentation
demonstrating that the property owner, who lives in
the home, is an individual with a disability as defined under the Acts.

X The applicant has demonstrated that the existing
interior and layout of the of the residence is not
suitable for long-term stay for the individual with a
disability as defined under the Acts. If the reasonable accommodation permit is not granted, the applicant
will be forced to relocate to other housing. The
applicant has demonstrated that the proposed
modifications are necessary to make 131 Valley View
available to herself so that she can continue to
comfortably reside at the property.

X The design of the proposed project would minimize
the amount of construction work and expense
required to provide the necessary accessibility
upgrades:
• Covering the front porch would create a safe
transition from the front of the property to the
existing entrance.
• Locating the dining room expansion on the
northwest portion of the property would avoid
the need to regrade the land, as a graded
area is already available for development on
northwest portion of the property.
• The expansion on the southwest portion of
the property will allow for safer mobility within
the existing bedroom.

All together, the proposed design would require only
minimal modifications to the floor plan of the
residence, whereas alternative designs would

4. Whether the requested
accommodation would
negatively impact
surrounding uses or
properties;

5. Whether the requested
reasonable accommodation
would impose an undue
financial or administrative
burden on the city; and

6. Whether the requested
reasonable accommodation
would require a
fundamental alteration in
the nature of a city program
or law, including, but not
limited to, land use and
zoning.

X
1,
Request for Reasonable Accommodation
Project No. RA24-001 (PLAN23-151)
require major modifications to the home's layout, at
a high cost to the homeowner. There are no
alternative accommodations which provide an
equivalent level of benefit, taking into account both
utility and cost.

Concerns have been expressed that the project might
negatively impact surrounding properties due to the
proximity of the project to the main buildings located
on adjacent properties.

While the project will encroach into the required
building setback; it will not expand beyond the
existing east elevation of the home towards the
neighboring property at the northeast, and thereby
does not worsen the separation between the two
main buildings. Further, the project will not increase
the height of the roofline and will not be visible from the public street.

X The fee for the reasonable accommodation permit
has been paid in full to account for staff time and
noticing procedures per SRMC Section 14.26.050.

The City would not incur any additional financial or
administrative burden. Thus, the requested
accommodation would not impose an undue financial
or administrative burden on the City.

X A reasonable accommodation permit to provide
equitable ADA access is permitted per SRMC
Chapter 14.26 and is part of the nature of the City's
existing land use planning. Granting the request
would not require a fundamental alternation in any
City program.

The Federal Fair Housing Act of and California's Fair Employment and Housing Act impose an affirmative duty on local governments to make reasonable accommodation in their land use and zoning regulations and practices when such accommodation may be necessary to afford individuals with disabilities an equal opportunity to housing. Per SRMC Section

14.26.060(A), the written decision to grant or deny a request for reasonable accommodation shall be consistent with the Federal Fair Housing Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act and shall be based on consideration of the factors above. No single factor is dispositive in making a decision on a reasonable accommodation request; rather, the factors are considered all together. Here, five of the six factors weigh in favor of granting the reasonable accommodation request. The only factor that weighs against granting the request is whether the requested accommodation has a negative impact on surrounding properties.

While neighbors have expressed their concern that the additions would negatively impact their properties, the setback between the two main buildings is not decreased or worsened.

Further, as conditioned, the project will be reviewed by the proper departments to ensure safe construction. Accordingly, the City finds that the impacts would be minimal. Considering these factors on the whole, the City finds that, consistent with the Federal Fair Housing Act and California's Fair Employment and Housing Act, the reasonable accommodation request must be approved.

Public Notice
Pursuant to SRMC Section 14.26.050, notice was mailed to the owners of record of all properties that are immediately adjacent to the subject property fifteen (15) days prior to the rendering of this decision. Two requests for information on the project were received and staff met with a set of concerned neighbors. No no additional comments have been shared with the city as of the date of the creation of this document.

Planning Division Conditions of Approval

1. Plans and Representations Become Conditions. All information and representations including the building techniques, materials, elevations and appearance of the project, as presented for approval on plans, dated March 15, 2024, and on file with the Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division, shall be the same as required for the issuance of a building permit, except as modified by these conditions of approval. Minor modifications or revisions to the project shall be subject to review and approval by Planning staff. Modifications deemed not minor by the Community and Economic Development Director may require review and approval as an amendment to the Request for a Reasonable Accommodation.

2. Possible Impact of timing of ADU on Project. The ADU shown on the plan set appears to structurally support the proposed addition on the northwest side of the project. If the ADU is not included in the plans submitted for building permit review, the Planning Division may require amended support of the project in a way that is generally consistent with the approved project plans.

3. Conditions Shall be Printed on Plans. The conditions of this Permit shall be printed on the second sheet of each plan set submitted for a building permit pursuant to this permit, under the title 'Request for Reasonable Accommodation Conditions'. Additional sheets may also be used if the second sheet is not of sufficient size to list all of the conditions.

The sheet(s) containing the conditions shall be of the same size as those sheets containing the construction drawings; 8-1/2" by 11" sheets are not acceptable.

4. Applicant Responsible for Compliance with Conditions. The applicant shall ensure compliance with all of the following conditions, including submittal to the project planner

Request for Reasonable Accommodation
Project No. RA24-001 (PLAN23-151)
of required approval signatures at the times specified. Failure to comply with any condition may result in construction being stopped, issuance of a citation, and/or modification or revocation of this permit.

5. Subject to All Applicable Laws and Regulations. The approved use and/or construction is subject to, and shall comply with, all applicable City Ordinances and laws and regulations of other governmental agencies. Prior to construction, the applicant shall identify and secure all applicable permits from the Building Division, Public Works Department and other affected City divisions and departments.

6. Permit Validity. This Permit shall become effective on October 25, 2024 and shall be valid for a period of two (2) years from the date of final approval, or October 25, 2026, and shall become null and void if a building permit is not issued or a time extension granted by October 25, 2026. A permit for the construction of a building or structure is deemed exercised when a valid City building permit, if required, is issued, and construction has lawfully commenced.

7. Construction Hours: Consistent with the City of San Rafael Municipal Code Section

8.13.050.A, construction hours shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 9:00 a.m to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Construction shall not be permitted on Sundays or City-observed holidays. Construction activities shall include delivery of materials, hauling materials off-site; startup of construction equipment engines, arrival of construction workers, paying of radios and other noises caused by equipment and/or construction workers arriving at, or working on, the site.

8. Landscaping. Landscaping and irrigation must meet the Marin Municipal Water District's (MMWD) water conservation rules and regulations. All existing landscaping damaged during construction shall be replaced. All landscaping shall be maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, free of weeds and debris. Any dying or dead landscaping shall be replaced in a timely fashion. No part of the existing landscaping shall be removed, unless their removal has been reviewed and approved by the Planning Division.

9. Exterior Lighting. All exterior lighting shall be energy efficient where feasible; and shielded and directed downward and away from property lines to prevent excessive glare beyond the subject property (per SRMC Section 14.16.227).

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISION
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

OFFICE OF FAIR HOUSING AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY
Washington, D.C.

March 5, 2008

JOINT STATEMENT OF

THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

AND THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

REASONABLE MODIFICATIONS UNDER THE

FAIR HOUSING ACT
Introduction
The Department of Justice (“DOJ”) and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) are jointly responsible for enforcing the federal Fair Housing Act1 (the “Act”), which prohibits discrimination in housing on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, familial status, and disability.2 One type of disability discrimination prohibited by the Act is a refusal to permit, at the expense of the person with a disability, reasonable modifications of existing premises occupied or to be occupied by such person if such modifications may be necessary to afford such person full enjoyment of the premises.3 HUD and DOJ frequently respond to complaints alleging that housing providers have violated the Act by refusing reasonable modifications to persons with disabilities. This Statement provides technical assistance regarding the rights and obligations of persons with disabilities and housing providers under the Act relating to reasonable modifications.4
1 The Fair Housing Act is codified at 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601-3619. 2 The Act uses the term “handicap” instead of “disability.” Both terms have the same legal meaning. See Bragdon v. Abbott, 524 U.S. 624, 631 (1998) (noting that the definition of “disability” in the Americans with Disabilities Act is drawn almost verbatim “from the definition of ‘handicap’ contained in the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988”). This document uses the term “disability,” which is more generally accepted. 3 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(A).
4 This Statement does not address the principles relating to reasonable accommodations. For further information see the Joint Statement of the Department of Housing and Urban This Statement is not intended to provide specific guidance regarding the Act’s design and construction requirements for multifamily dwellings built for first occupancy after March 13, 1991. Some of the reasonable modifications discussed in this Statement are features of accessible design that are required for covered multifamily dwellings pursuant to the Act’s design and construction requirements. As a result, people involved in the design and construction of multifamily dwellings are advised to consult the Act at 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(c), the implementing regulations at 24 C.F.R. § 100.205, the Fair Housing Accessibility Guidelines, and the Fair Housing Act Design Manual. All of these are available on HUD’s website at www.hud.gov/offices/fheo/disabilities/index.cfm. Additional technical guidance on the design and construction requirements can also be found on HUD’s website and the Fair Housing Accessibility FIRST website at: http://www.fairhousingfirst.org.

Questions and Answers

1. What types of discrimination against persons with disabilities does the Act prohibit? The Act prohibits housing providers from discriminating against housing applicants or residents because of their disability or the disability of anyone associated with them and from treating persons with disabilities less favorably than others because of their disability. The Act makes it unlawful for any person to refuse “to permit, at the expense of the [disabled] person, reasonable modifications of existing premises occupied or to be occupied by such person if such modifications may be necessary to afford such person full enjoyment of the premises, except that, in the case of a rental, the landlord may where it is reasonable to do so condition permission for a modification on the renter agreeing to restore the interior of the premises to the condition that existed before the modification, reasonable wear and tear excepted.”5 The Act also makes it unlawful for any person to refuse “to make reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, practices, or services, when such accommodations may be necessary to afford ... person(s) [with disabilities] equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling.” The Act also prohibits housing providers from refusing residency to persons with disabilities, or, with some narrow exceptions6, Development and the Department of Justice: Reasonable Accommodations Under the Fair Housing Act, dated May 17, 2004. This Joint Statement is available at www.hud.gov/offices/fheo/disabilities/index.cfm and
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/housing/jointstatement_ra.htm. See also 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(B).

This Statement also does not discuss in depth the obligations of housing providers who are recipients of federal financial assistance to make and pay for structural changes to units and common and public areas that are needed as a reasonable accommodation for a person’s disability. See Question 31.
5 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(A). HUD regulations pertaining to reasonable modifications may be found at 24 C.F.R. § 100.203.
6 The Act contemplates certain limits to the receipt of reasonable accommodations or reasonable modifications. For example, a tenant may be required to deposit money into an interest bearing 2 placing conditions on their residency, because those persons may require reasonable modifications or reasonable accommodations.

2. What is a reasonable modification under the Fair Housing Act? A reasonable modification is a structural change made to existing premises, occupied or to be occupied by a person with a disability, in order to afford such person full enjoyment of the premises. Reasonable modifications can include structural changes to interiors and exteriors of dwellings and to common and public use areas. A request for a reasonable modification may be made at any time during the tenancy. The Act makes it unlawful for a housing provider or homeowners’ association to refuse to allow a reasonable modification to the premises when such a modification may be necessary to afford persons with disabilities full enjoyment of the premises.

To show that a requested modification may be necessary, there must be an identifiable relationship, or nexus, between the requested modification and the individual’s disability.

Further, the modification must be “reasonable.” Examples of modifications that typically are reasonable include widening doorways to make rooms more accessible for persons in wheelchairs; installing grab bars in bathrooms; lowering kitchen cabinets to a height suitable for persons in wheelchairs; adding a ramp to make a primary entrance accessible for persons in wheelchairs; or altering a walkway to provide access to a public or common use area. These examples of reasonable modifications are not exhaustive.

3. Who is responsible for the expense of making a reasonable modification? The Fair Housing Act provides that while the housing provider must permit the modification, the tenant is responsible for paying the cost of the modification.

4. Who qualifies as a person with a disability under the Act? The Act defines a person with a disability to include (1) individuals with a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities; (2) individuals who are regarded as having such an impairment; and (3) individuals with a record of such an impairment.

The term “physical or mental impairment” includes, but is not limited to, such diseases and conditions as orthopedic, visual, speech and hearing impairments, cerebral palsy, autism, epilepsy, muscular dystrophy, multiple sclerosis, cancer, heart disease, diabetes, Human Immunodeficiency Virus infection, mental retardation, emotional illness, drug addiction (other account to ensure that funds are available to restore the interior of a dwelling to its previous state. See, e.g., Question 21 below. A reasonable accommodation can be conditioned on meeting reasonable safety requirements, such as requiring persons who use motorized wheelchairs to operate them in a manner that does not pose a risk to the safety of others or cause damage to other persons’ property. See Joint Statement on Reasonable Accommodations, Question 11. 3 than addiction caused by current, illegal use of a controlled substance) and alcoholism.

The term “substantially limits” suggests that the limitation is “significant” or “to a large degree.”
The term “major life activity” means those activities that are of central importance to daily life, such as seeing, hearing, walking, breathing, performing manual tasks, caring for one’s self, learning, and speaking. This list of major life activities is not exhaustive.

5. Who is entitled to a reasonable modification under the Fair Housing Act? Persons who meet the Fair Housing Act’s definition of “person with a disability” may be entitled to a reasonable modification under the Act. However, there must be an identifiable relationship, or nexus, between the requested modification and the individual’s disability. If no such nexus exists, then the housing provider may refuse to allow the requested modification.

Example 1: A tenant, whose arthritis impairs the use of her hands and causes her substantial difficulty in using the doorknobs in her apartment, wishes to replace the doorknobs with levers. Since there is a relationship between the tenant’s disability and the requested modification and the modification is reasonable, the housing provider must allow her to make the modification at the tenant’s expense.

Example 2: A homeowner with a mobility disability asks the condo association to permit him to change his roofing from shaker shingles to clay tiles and fiberglass shingles because he alleges that the shingles are less fireproof and put him at greater risk during a fire.

There is no evidence that the shingles permitted by the homeowner’s association provide inadequate fire protection and the person with the disability has not identified a nexus between his disability and the need for clay tiles and fiberglass shingles. The homeowner’s association is not required to permit the homeowner’s modification because the homeowner’s request is not reasonable and there is no nexus between the request and the disability.

6. If a disability is not obvious, what kinds of information may a housing provider request from the person with a disability in support of a requested reasonable modification?
A housing provider may not ordinarily inquire as to the nature and severity of an individual’s disability. However, in response to a request for a reasonable modification, a housing provider may request reliable disability-related information that (1) is necessary to verify that the person meets the Act’s definition of disability (i.e., has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities), (2) describes the needed modification, and (3) shows the relationship between the person’s disability and the need for the requested modification. Depending on the individual’s circumstances, information verifying that the person meets the Act’s definition of disability can usually be provided by the individual herself (e.g., proof that an individual under 65 years of age receives Supplemental Security 4 Income or Social Security Disability Insurance benefits8 or a credible statement by the
individual). A doctor or other medical professional, a peer support group, a non-medical service agency, or a reliable third party who is in a position to know about the individual’s disability may also provide verification of a disability. In most cases, an individual’s medical records or detailed information about the nature of a person’s disability is not necessary for this inquiry.

Once a housing provider has established that a person meets the Act’s definition of disability, the provider’s request for documentation should seek only the information that is necessary to evaluate if the reasonable modification is needed because of a disability. Such information must be kept confidential and must not be shared with other persons unless they need the information to make or assess a decision to grant or deny a reasonable modification request or unless disclosure is required by law (e.g., a court-issued subpoena requiring disclosure).

7. What kinds of information, if any, may a housing provider request from a person with an obvious or known disability who is requesting a reasonable modification? A housing provider is entitled to obtain information that is necessary to evaluate whether a requested reasonable modification may be necessary because of a disability. If a person’s disability is obvious, or otherwise known to the housing provider, and if the need for the requested modification is also readily apparent or known, then the provider may not request any additional information about the requester’s disability or the disability-related need for the modification.

If the requester’s disability is known or readily apparent to the provider, but the need for the modification is not readily apparent or known, the provider may request only information that is necessary to evaluate the disability-related need for the modification.

Example 1: An applicant with an obvious mobility impairment who uses a motorized scooter to move around asks the housing provider to permit her to install a ramp at the entrance of the apartment building. Since the physical disability (i.e., difficulty walking) and the disability-related need for the requested modification are both readily apparent, the provider may not require the applicant to provide any additional information about her disability or the need for the requested modification.
8 Persons who meet the definition of disability for purposes of receiving Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) or Social Security Disability Income (“SSDI”) benefits in most cases meet the definition of a disability under the Fair Housing Act, although the converse may not be true.

See, e.g., Cleveland v. Policy Management Systems Corp, 526 U.S. 795, 797 (1999) (noting that SSDI provides benefits to a person with a disability so severe that she is unable to do her previous work and cannot engage in any other kind of substantial gainful work whereas a person pursuing an action for disability discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act may state a claim that “with a reasonable accommodation” she could perform the essential functions of the job).
5 Example 2: A deaf tenant asks his housing provider to allow him to install extra electrical lines and a cable line so the tenant can use computer equipment that helps him communicate with others. If the tenant’s disability is known, the housing provider may not require him to document his disability; however, since the need for the electrical and cable lines may not be apparent, the housing provider may request information that is necessary to support the disability-related need for the requested modification.

8. Who must comply with the Fair Housing Act’s reasonable modification requirements?
Any person or entity engaging in prohibited conduct – i.e., refusing to allow an individual to make reasonable modifications when such modifications may be necessary to afford a person with a disability full enjoyment of the premises – may be held liable unless they fall within an exception to the Act’s coverage. Courts have applied the Act to individuals, corporations, associations and others involved in the provision of housing and residential lending, including property owners, housing managers, homeowners and condominium associations, lenders, real estate agents, and brokerage services. Courts have also applied the Act to state and local governments, most often in the context of exclusionary zoning or other land-use decisions. See, e.g., City of Edmonds v. Oxford House, Inc., 514 U.S. 725, 729 (1995); Project Life v. Glendening, 139 F. Supp. 2d 703, 710 (D. Md. 2001), aff’d, 2002 WL 2012545 (4th Cir. 2002).

9. What is the difference between a reasonable accommodation and a reasonable modification under the Fair Housing Act?9
Under the Fair Housing Act, a reasonable modification is a structural change made to the premises whereas a reasonable accommodation is a change, exception, or adjustment to a rule, policy, practice, or service. A person with a disability may need either a reasonable accommodation or a reasonable modification, or both, in order to have an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling, including public and common use spaces. Generally, under the Fair Housing Act, the housing provider is responsible for the costs associated with a reasonable accommodation unless it is an undue financial and administrative burden, while the tenant or someone acting on the tenant’s behalf, is responsible for costs associated with a reasonable modification. See Reasonable Accommodation Statement, Questions 7 and 8.

Example 1: Because of a mobility disability, a tenant wants to install grab bars in the bathroom. This is a reasonable modification and must be permitted at the tenant’s expense. 9 Housing providers that receive federal financial assistance are also subject to the requirements of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of l973. 29 U.S.C. § 794. Section 504, and its implementing regulations at 24 C.F.R. Part 8, prohibit discrimination based on disability, and obligate housing providers to make and pay for structural changes to facilities, if needed as a reasonable accommodation for applicants and tenants with disabilities, unless doing so poses an undue financial and administrative burden. See Question 31. 6 Example 2: Because of a hearing disability, a tenant wishes to install a peephole in her door so she can see who is at the door before she opens it. This is a reasonable modification and must be permitted at the tenant’s expense.

Example 3: Because of a mobility disability, a tenant wants to install a ramp outside the building in a common area. This is a reasonable modification and must be permitted at the tenant’s expense. See also Questions 19, 20 and 21.

Example 4: Because of a vision disability, a tenant requests permission to have a guide dog reside with her in her apartment. The housing provider has a “no-pets” policy. This is a request for a reasonable accommodation, and the housing provider must grant the accommodation.

10. Are reasonable modifications restricted to the interior of a dwelling? No. Reasonable modifications are not limited to the interior of a dwelling. Reasonable modifications may also be made to public and common use areas such as widening entrances to fitness centers or laundry rooms, or for changes to exteriors of dwelling units such as installing a ramp at the entrance to a dwelling.

11. Is a request for a parking space because of a physical disability a reasonable accommodation or a reasonable modification?
Courts have treated requests for parking spaces as requests for a reasonable accommodation and have placed the responsibility for providing the parking space on the housing provider, even if provision of an accessible or assigned parking space results in some cost to the provider. For example, courts have required a housing provider to provide an assigned space even though the housing provider had a policy of not assigning parking spaces or had a waiting list for available parking. However, housing providers may not require persons with disabilities to pay extra fees as a condition of receiving accessible parking spaces.

Providing a parking accommodation could include creating signage, repainting markings, redistributing spaces, or creating curb cuts. This list is not exhaustive.

12. What if the structural changes being requested by the tenant or applicant are in a building that is subject to the design and construction requirements of the Fair Housing Act and the requested structural changes are a feature of accessible design that should have already existed in the unit or common area, e.g., doorways wide enough to accommodate a wheelchair, or an accessible entryway to a unit. 7 The Fair Housing Act provides that covered multifamily dwellings built for first occupancy after March 13, 1991, shall be designed and constructed to meet certain minimum accessibility and adaptability standards. If any of the structural changes needed by the tenant are ones that should have been included in the unit or public and common use area when constructed then the housing provider may be responsible for providing and paying for those requested structural changes. However, if the requested structural changes are not a feature of accessible design that should have already existed in the building pursuant to the design and construction requirements under the Act, then the tenant is responsible for paying for the cost of the structural changes as a reasonable modification.

Although the design and construction provisions only apply to certain multifamily dwellings built for first occupancy since 1991, a tenant may request reasonable modifications to housing built prior to that date. In such cases, the housing provider must allow the modifications, and the tenant is responsible for paying for the costs under the Fair Housing Act.

For a discussion of the design and construction requirements of the Act, and their applicability, see HUD’s website at: www.hud.gov/offices/fheo/disabilities/index.cfm and the Fair Housing Accessibility FIRST website at: http://www.fairhousingfirst.org.

Example 1: A tenant with a disability who uses a wheelchair resides in a ground floor apartment in a non-elevator building that was built in 1995. Buildings built for first occupancy after March 13, 1991 are covered by the design and construction requirements of the Fair Housing Act. Because the building is a non-elevator building, all ground floor units must meet the minimum accessibility requirements of the Act. The doors in the apartment are not wide enough for passage using a wheelchair in violation of the design and construction requirements but can be made so through retrofitting. Under these circumstances, one federal court has held that the tenant may have a potential claim against the housing provider.

Example 2: A tenant with a disability resides in an apartment in a building that was built in 1987. The doors in the unit are not wide enough for passage using a wheelchair but can be made so through retrofitting. If the tenant meets the other requirements for obtaining a modification, the tenant may widen the doorways, at her own expense.

Example 3: A tenant with a disability resides in an apartment in a building that was built in 1993 in compliance with the design and construction requirements of the Fair Housing Act.

The tenant wants to install grab bars in the bathroom because of her disability. Provided that the tenant meets the other requirements for obtaining a modification, the tenant may install the grab bars at her own expense.

13. Who is responsible for expenses associated with a reasonable modification, e.g., for upkeep or maintenance?
The tenant is responsible for upkeep and maintenance of a modification that is used exclusively by her. If a modification is made to a common area that is normally maintained by the housing provider, then the housing provider is responsible for the upkeep and maintenance of the modification. If a modification is made to a common area that is not normally maintained by 8 the housing provider, then the housing provider has no responsibility under the Fair Housing Act to maintain the modification.

Example 1: Because of a mobility disability, a tenant, at her own expense, installs a lift inside her unit to allow her access to a second story. She is required to maintain the lift at her expense because it is not in a common area.

Example 2: Because of a mobility disability, a tenant installs a ramp in the lobby of a multifamily building at her own expense. The ramp is used by other tenants and the public as well as the tenant with the disability. The housing provider is responsible for maintaining the ramp.

Example 3: A tenant leases a detached, single-family home. Because of a mobility disability, the tenant installs a ramp at the outside entrance to the home. The housing provider provides no snow removal services, and the lease agreement specifically states that snow removal is the responsibility of the individual tenant. Under these circumstances, the housing provider has no responsibility under the Fair Housing Act to remove snow on the tenant’s ramp.

However, if the housing provider normally provides snow removal for the outside of the building and the common areas, the housing provider is responsible for removing the snow from the ramp as well.

14. In addition to current residents, are prospective tenants and buyers of housing protected by the reasonable modification provisions of the Fair Housing Act? Yes. A person may make a request for a reasonable modification at any time. An individual may request a reasonable modification of the dwelling at the time that the potential tenancy or purchase is discussed. Under the Act, a housing provider cannot deny or restrict access to housing because a request for a reasonable modification is made. Such conduct would constitute discrimination. The modification does not have to be made, however, unless it is reasonable. See Questions 2, 16, 21 and 23.

15. When and how should an individual request permission to make a modification? Under the Act, a resident or an applicant for housing makes a reasonable modification request whenever she makes clear to the housing provider that she is requesting permission to make a structural change to the premises because of her disability. She should explain that she has a disability, if not readily apparent or not known to the housing provider, the type of modification she is requesting, and the relationship between the requested modification and her disability.

An applicant or resident is not entitled to receive a reasonable modification unless she requests one. However, the Fair Housing Act does not require that a request be made in a particular manner or at a particular time. A person with a disability need not personally make the reasonable modification request; the request can be made by a family member or someone else who is acting on her behalf. An individual making a reasonable modification request does 9 --
not need to mention the Act or use the words “reasonable modification.” However, the requester must make the request in a manner that a reasonable person would understand to be a request for permission to make a structural change because of a disability.

Although a reasonable modification request can be made orally or in writing, it is usually helpful for both the resident and the housing provider if the request is made in writing. This will help prevent misunderstandings regarding what is being requested, or whether the request was made. To facilitate the processing and consideration of the request, residents or prospective residents may wish to check with a housing provider in advance to determine if the provider has a preference regarding the manner in which the request is made. However, housing providers must give appropriate consideration to reasonable modification requests even if the requester makes the request orally or does not use the provider's preferred forms or procedures for making such requests.

16. Does a person with a disability have to have the housing provider’s approval before making a reasonable modification to the dwelling?
Yes. A person with a disability must have the housing provider’s approval before making the modification. However, if the person with a disability meets the requirements under the Act for a reasonable modification and provides the relevant documents and assurances, the housing provider cannot deny the request.

17. What if the housing provider fails to act promptly on a reasonable modification request?
A provider has an obligation to provide prompt responses to a reasonable modification request. An undue delay in responding to a reasonable modification request may be deemed a failure to permit a reasonable modification.

18. What if the housing provider proposes that the tenant move to a different unit in lieu of making a proposed modification?
The housing provider cannot insist that a tenant move to a different unit in lieu of allowing the tenant to make a modification that complies with the requirements for reasonable modifications. See Questions 2, 21 and 23. Housing providers should be aware that persons with disabilities typically have the most accurate knowledge regarding the functional limitations posed by their disability.

Example: As a result of a mobility disability, a tenant requests that he be permitted, at his expense, to install a ramp so that he can access his apartment using his motorized wheelchair.

The existing entrance to his dwelling is not wheelchair accessible because the route to the front door requires going up a step. The housing provider proposes that in lieu of installing the ramp, the tenant move to a different unit in the building. The tenant is not obligated to accept the alternative proposed by the housing provider, as his request to modify his unit is reasonable and must be approved.
10 --

19. What if the housing provider wants an alternative modification or alternative design for the proposed modification that does not cost more but that the housing provider considers more aesthetically pleasing?
In general, the housing provider cannot insist on an alternative modification or an alternative design if the tenant complies with the requirements for reasonable modifications. See Questions 2, 21 and 23. If the modification is to the interior of the unit and must be restored to its original condition when the tenant moves out, then the housing provider cannot require that its design be used instead of the tenant’s design. However, if the modification is to a common area or an aspect of the interior of the unit that would not have to be restored because it would not be reasonable to do so, and if the housing provider’s proposed design imposes no additional costs and still meets the tenant’s needs, then the modification should be done in accordance with the housing provider’s design. See Question 24 for a discussion of the restoration requirements.

Example 1: As a result of a mobility disability, a tenant requests that he be permitted, at his expense, to install a ramp so that he can access his apartment using his motorized wheelchair.

The existing entrance to his dwelling is not wheelchair accessible because the route to the front door requires going up a step. The housing provider proposes an alternative design for a ramp but the alternative design costs more and does not meet the tenant’s needs. The tenant is not obligated to accept the alternative modification, as his request to modify his unit is reasonable and must be approved.

Example 2: As a result of a mobility disability, a tenant requests permission to widen a doorway to allow passage with her wheelchair. All of the doorways in the unit are trimmed with a decorative trim molding that does not cost any more than the standard trim molding. Because in usual circumstances it would not be reasonable to require that the doorway be restored at the end of the tenancy, the tenant should use the decorative trim when he widens the doorway.

20. What if the housing provider wants a more costly design for the requested modification?
If the housing provider wishes a modification to be made with more costly materials, in order to satisfy the landlord’s aesthetic standards, the tenant must agree only if the housing provider pays those additional costs. Further, as discussed in Questions 21 and 23 below, housing providers may require that the tenant obtain all necessary building permits and may require that the work be performed in a workmanlike manner. If the housing provider requires more costly materials be used to satisfy her workmanship preferences beyond the requirements of the applicable local codes, the tenant must agree only if the housing provider pays for those additional costs as well. In such a case, however, the housing provider’s design must still meet the tenant’s needs.

21. What types of documents and assurances may a housing provider require regarding the modification before granting the reasonable modification? 11 A housing provider may require that a request for a reasonable modification include a description of the proposed modification both before changes are made to the dwelling and before granting the modification. A description of the modification to be made may be provided to a housing provider either orally or in writing depending on the extent and nature of the proposed modification. A housing provider may also require that the tenant obtain any building permits needed to make the modifications, and that the work be performed in a workmanlike manner.

The regulations implementing the Fair Housing Act state that housing providers generally cannot impose conditions on a proposed reasonable modification. For example, a housing provider cannot require that the tenant obtain additional insurance or increase the security deposit as a condition that must be met before the modification will be allowed.

However, the Preamble to the Final Regulations also indicates that there are some conditions that can be placed on a tenant requesting a reasonable modification. For example, in certain limited and narrow circumstances, a housing provider may require that the tenant deposit money into an interest bearing account to ensure that funds are available to restore the interior of a dwelling to its previous state, ordinary wear and tear excepted. Imposing conditions not contemplated by the Fair Housing Act and its implementing regulations may be the same as an illegal refusal to permit the modification.

22. May a housing provider or homeowner’s association condition approval of the requested modification on the requester obtaining special liability insurance? No. Imposition of such a requirement would constitute a violation of the Fair Housing Act.

Example: Because of a mobility disability, a tenant wants to install a ramp outside his unit. The housing provider informs the tenant that the ramp may be installed, but only after the tenant obtains separate liability insurance for the ramp out of concern for the housing provider’s potential liability. The housing provider may not impose a requirement of liability insurance as a condition of approval of the ramp.

23. Once the housing provider has agreed to a reasonable modification, may she insist that a particular contractor be used to perform the work? No. The housing provider cannot insist that a particular contractor do the work. The housing provider may only require that whoever does the work is reasonably able to complete the work in a workmanlike manner and obtain all necessary building permits.

24. If a person with a disability has made reasonable modifications to the interior of the dwelling, must she restore all of them when she moves out? The tenant is obligated to restore those portions of the interior of the dwelling to their previous condition only where “it is reasonable to do so” and where the housing provider has requested the restoration. The tenant is not responsible for expenses associated with reasonable 12 wear and tear. In general, if the modifications do not affect the housing provider’s or subsequent tenant’s use or enjoyment of the premises, the tenant cannot be required to restore the modifications to their prior state. A housing provider may choose to keep the modifications in place at the end of the tenancy. See also Question 28.

Example 1: Because the tenant uses a wheelchair, she obtained permission from her housing provider to remove the base cabinets and lower the kitchen sink to provide for greater accessibility. It is reasonable for the housing provider to ask the tenant to replace the cabinets and raise the sink back to its original height.

Example 2: Because of a mobility disability, a tenant obtained approval from the housing provider to install grab bars in the bathroom. As part of the installation, the contractor had to construct reinforcements on the underside of the wall. These reinforcements are not visible and do not detract from the use of the apartment. It is reasonable for the housing provider to require the tenant to remove the grab bars, but it is not reasonable for the housing provider to require the tenant to remove the reinforcements.

Example 3: Because of a mobility disability, a tenant obtained approval from the housing provider to widen doorways to allow him to maneuver in his wheelchair. In usual circumstances, it is not reasonable for the housing provider to require him to restore the doorways to their prior width.

25. Of the reasonable modifications made to the interior of a dwelling that must be restored, must the person with a disability pay to make those restorations when she moves out?
Yes. Reasonable restorations of the dwelling required as a result of modifications made to the interior of the dwelling must be paid for by the tenant unless the next occupant of the dwelling wants to retain the reasonable modifications and where it is reasonable to do so, the next occupant is willing to establish a new interest bearing escrow account. The subsequent tenant would have to restore the modifications to the prior condition at the end of his tenancy if it is reasonable to do so and if requested by the housing provider. See also Question 24.

26. If a person with a disability has made a reasonable modification to the exterior of the dwelling, or a common area, must she restore it to its original condition when she moves out?
No. The Fair Housing Act expressly provides that housing providers may only require restoration of modifications made to interiors of the dwelling at the end of the tenancy.

Reasonable modifications such as ramps to the front door of the dwelling or modifications made to laundry rooms or building entrances are not required to be restored.

27. May a housing provider increase or require a person with a disability to pay a security deposit if she requests a reasonable modification? 13 No. The housing provider may not require an increased security deposit as the result of a request for a reasonable modification, nor may a housing provider require a tenant to pay a security deposit when one is not customarily required. However, a housing provider may be able to take other steps to ensure that money will be available to pay for restoration of the interior of the premises at the end of the tenancy. See Questions 21 and 28.

28. May a housing provider take other steps to ensure that money will be available to pay for restoration of the interior of the premises at the end of the tenancy? Where it is necessary in order to ensure with reasonable certainty that funds will be available to pay for the restorations at the end of the tenancy, the housing provider may negotiate with the tenant as part of a restoration agreement a provision that requires the tenant to make payments into an interest-bearing escrow account. A housing provider may not routinely require that tenants place money in escrow accounts when a modification is sought. Both the amount and the terms of the escrow payment are subject to negotiation between the housing provider and the tenant.

Simply because an individual has a disability does not mean that she is less creditworthy than an individual without a disability. The decision to require that money be placed in an escrow account should be based on the following factors: 1) the extent and nature of the proposed modifications; 2) the expected duration of the lease; 3) the credit and tenancy history of the individual tenant; and 4) other information that may bear on the risk to the housing provider that the premises will not be restored.

If the housing provider decides to require payment into an escrow account, the amount of money to be placed in the account cannot exceed the cost of restoring the modifications, and the period of time during which the tenant makes payment into the escrow account must be reasonable. Although a housing provider may require that funds be placed in escrow, it does not automatically mean that the full amount of money needed to make the future restorations can be required to be paid at the time that the modifications are sought. In addition, it is important to note that interest from the account accrues to the benefit of the tenant. If an escrow account is established, and the housing provider later decides not to have the unit restored, then all funds in the account, including the interest, must be promptly returned to the tenant.

Example 1: Because of a mobility disability, a tenant requests a reasonable modification. The modification includes installation of grab bars in the bathroom. The tenant has an excellent credit history and has lived in the apartment for five years before becoming disabled. Under these circumstances, it may not be reasonable to require payment into an escrow account.

Example 2: Because of a mobility disability, a new tenant with a poor credit history wants to lower the kitchen cabinets to a more accessible height. It may be reasonable for the housing provider to require payment into an interest bearing escrow account to ensure that funds are available for restoration.
14 --
Example 3: A housing provider requires all tenants with disabilities to pay a set sum into an interest bearing escrow account before approving any request for a reasonable modification. The amount required by the housing provider has no relationship to the actual cost of the restoration. This type of requirement violates the Fair Housing Act.

29. What if a person with a disability moves into a rental unit and wants the carpet taken up because her wheelchair does not move easily across carpeting? Is that a reasonable accommodation or modification?
Depending on the circumstances, removal of carpeting may be either a reasonable accommodation or a reasonable modification.

Example 1: If the housing provider has a practice of not permitting a tenant to change flooring in a unit and there is a smooth, finished floor underneath the carpeting, generally, allowing the tenant to remove the carpet would be a reasonable accommodation.

Example 2: If there is no finished flooring underneath the carpeting, generally, removing the carpeting and installing a finished floor would be a reasonable modification that would have to be done at the tenant’s expense. If the finished floor installed by the tenant does not affect the housing provider’s or subsequent tenant’s use or enjoyment of the premises, the tenant would not have to restore the carpeting at the conclusion of the tenancy. See Questions 24 and 25.

Example 3: If the housing provider has a practice of replacing the carpeting before a new tenant moves in, and there is an existing smooth, finished floor underneath, then it would be a reasonable accommodation of his normal practice of installing new carpeting for the housing provider to just take up the old carpeting and wait until the tenant with a mobility disability moves out to put new carpeting down.

30. Who is responsible for paying for the costs of structural changes to a dwelling unit that has not yet been constructed if a purchaser with a disability needs different or additional features to make the unit meet her disability-related needs? If the dwelling unit is not subject to the design and construction requirements (i.e., a detached single family home or a multi-story townhouse without an elevator), then the purchaser is responsible for the additional costs associated with the structural changes. The purchaser is responsible for any additional cost that the structural changes might create over and above what the original design would have cost.

If the unit being purchased is subject to the design and construction requirements of the Fair Housing Act, then all costs associated with incorporating the features required by the Act are borne by the builder. If a purchaser with a disability needs different or additional features added to a unit under construction or about to be constructed beyond those already required by the Act, and it would cost the builder more to provide the requested features, the structural changes would be considered a reasonable modification and the additional costs would have to 15 be borne by the purchaser. The purchaser is responsible for any additional cost that the structural changes might create over and above what the original design would have cost.

Example 1: A buyer with a mobility disability is purchasing a single family dwelling under construction and asks for a bathroom sink with a floorless base cabinet with retractable doors that allows the buyer to position his wheelchair under the sink. If the cabinet costs more than the standard vanity cabinet provided by the builder, the buyer is responsible for the additional cost, not the full cost of the requested cabinet. If, however, the alternative cabinet requested by the buyer costs less than or the same as the one normally provided by the builder, and the installation costs are also the same or less, then the builder should install the requested cabinet without any additional cost to the buyer.

Example 2: A buyer with a mobility disability is purchasing a ground floor unit in a detached townhouse that is designed with a concrete step at the front door. The buyer requests that the builder grade the entrance to eliminate the need for the step. If the cost of providing the at-grade entrance is no greater than the cost of building the concrete step, then the builder would have to provide the at-grade entrance without additional charge to the purchaser.

Example 3: A buyer with a mobility disability is purchasing a unit that is subject to the design and construction requirements of the Fair Housing Act. The buyer wishes to have grab bars installed in the unit as a reasonable modification to the bathroom. The builder is responsible for installing and paying for the wall reinforcements for the grab bars because these reinforcements are required under the design and construction provisions of the Act. The buyer is responsible for the costs of installing and paying for the grab bars.

31. Are the rules the same if a person with a disability lives in housing that receives federal financial assistance and the needed structural changes to the unit or common area are the result of the tenant having a disability?
Housing that receives federal financial assistance is covered by both the Fair Housing Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Under regulations implementing Section 504, structural changes needed by an applicant or resident with a disability in housing receiving federal financial assistance are considered reasonable accommodations. They must be paid for by the housing provider unless providing them would be an undue financial and administrative burden or a fundamental alteration of the program or unless the housing provider can accommodate the individual’s needs through other means. Housing that receives federal financial assistance and that is provided by state or local entities may also be covered by Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Example 1: A tenant who uses a wheelchair and who lives in privately owned housing needs a roll-in shower in order to bathe independently. Under the Fair Housing Act the tenant would be responsible for the costs of installing the roll-in shower as a reasonable modification to his unit.
16 Example 2: A tenant who uses a wheelchair and who lives in housing that receives federal financial assistance needs a roll-in shower in order to bathe independently. Under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the housing provider would be obligated to pay for and install the roll-in shower as a reasonable accommodation to the tenant unless doing so was an undue financial and administrative burden or unless the housing provider could meet the tenant’s disability-related needs by transferring the tenant to another appropriate unit that contains a roll-in shower.

HUD has provided more detailed information about Section 504’s requirements. See www.hud.gov/offices/fheo/disabilities/sect504.cfm.

32. If a person believes that she has been unlawfully denied a reasonable modification, what should that person do if she wants to challenge that denial under the Act? When a person with a disability believes that she has been subjected to a discriminatory housing practice, including a provider’s wrongful denial of a request for a reasonable modification, she may file a complaint with HUD within one year after the alleged denial or may file a lawsuit in federal district court within two years of the alleged denial. If a complaint is filed, HUD will investigate the complaint at no cost to the person with a disability.

There are several ways that a person may file a complaint with HUD:
• By placing a toll-free call to 1-800-669-9777 or TTY 1-800-927-9275; • By completing the “on-line” complaint form available on the HUD internet site: http://www.hud.gov; or
• By mailing a completed complaint form or letter to:

Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity
Department of Housing & Urban Development
451 Seventh Street, S.W., Room 5204
Washington, DC 20410-2000
Upon request, HUD will provide printed materials in alternate formats (large print, audio tapes, or Braille) and provide complainants with assistance in reading and completing forms.

The Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department brings lawsuits in federal courts across the country to end discriminatory practices and to seek monetary and other relief for individuals whose rights under the Fair Housing Act have been violated. The Civil Rights Division initiates lawsuits when it has reason to believe that a person or entity is involved in a “pattern or practice” of discrimination or when there has been a denial of rights to a group of persons that raises an issue of general public importance. The Division also participates as amicus curiae in federal court cases that raise important legal questions involving the application 17 and/or interpretation of the Act. To alert the Justice Department to matters involving a pattern or practice of discrimination, matters involving the denial of rights to groups of persons, or lawsuits raising issues that may be appropriate for amicus participation, contact:

U.S. Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division
Housing and Civil Enforcement Section – G St.
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Washington, DC 20530
For more information on the types of housing discrimination cases handled by the Civil Rights Division, please refer to the Housing and Civil Enforcement Section’s website at http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/housing/hcehome.html.

A HUD or Department of Justice decision not to proceed with a Fair Housing Act matter does not foreclose private plaintiffs from pursuing a private lawsuit. However, litigation can be an expensive, time-consuming, and uncertain process for all parties. HUD and the Department of Justice encourage parties to Fair Housing Act disputes to explore all reasonable alternatives to litigation, including alternative dispute resolution procedures, such as mediation. HUD attempts to conciliate all Fair Housing Act complaints. In addition, it is the Department of Justice’s policy to offer prospective defendants the opportunity to engage in pre-suit settlement negotiations, except in the most unusual circumstances. 18 ADDITION & NEW ATTACHED ADU PROJECT SITE DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 01.13.25
Δ
Δ EXISTING BUILDING ADDITION NEW ATTACHED ADU PORCH CONVERSION DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 01.13.25 7 MARK:
323.9 '
12" STU
8" TR[[
6" STUMP
6" TR[[
5" TR[[
.,
(jl
(jl
•
Z7.~
0 ~'- 1t7 o ...

EX-Tc 332.66'
EX-FL 332.25'
-+>
<5' ...
...
:z
<...,,-\
er>
• c..O
-+> ...
573·01·oo"W 73.59 '
.,
<D
'~/ [X. CONC. ST[PS
V
17 ., 27'-2" l7 ·
1> '
l>
1>
' "'
1>
"' 1>
1>
' ., "'
1> [X. -0R/V[WAY
'v'
' 1> '
.,
.,
6" fR[[
I
1 0)
"1
N
CJ7
VALLEY
.
"1
0 I")
.,
.,
.,
(Jl
___.
(Jl
-5'
.,
"'
' "
.
-
<.o
"1
' "'
.,
.,
hS:~l
WOOD[N POST
ROOF OUTLIN[
APN 1
[X. UTILITY BOX
EX-Tc 345_ 09 ,
EX-FL 344.65' SITE PLAN
0 u
N
0 L
0 L
+-' 0 &.-N u .-
i
L'. 8
Cl) '----.....5 r---
c I
.01 ~o en .-
(I) LO
0 Q)
>0
<(~
C ~m
3:: w :
0 >8
-........._
+-' >- _J C WW
0 _J <( _J LL u <( <(
·- > 0:::
o_ I o_ I ~z
<(
A-1

DEMO WALL
1 ABAB
2 3
1 2
3 EXISTING WALL EXISTING UPPER FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/4" = 1' DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 01.13.25 EXISTING LOWER FLOOR PLAN (GARAGE) SCALE: 1/4" = 1' • 0, I ;,., N • 0, I "' N • r--.

I
;,-,
•
I
0 • 0
I
-:.,.

N
(E) C
13'-7"
<9
0 (E) PRIMARY BEDROOM
I@
(E) CL
(E) BEDROOM
12'-6"
30'-7"
26'-3"
(E) GARAGE
58'-5"
6'-8" 7'-4" 10'-9"
il)D 0 G]rJ (E) BA TI-I
(E) BATI-1
(E) KITCHEN
a • @
(E) LINEN
(E) HALL
@
(E) CL (E) HALL
@I @
(E) BEDROOM
(E) PORCH
1 l'-1" 3'-1" g'
3'-5"
12'-1" 6'
@ @j)
(E) DINING ':.,- (E) PORCH I 0
@j)
r L..-------------
• "' (E) LIVING F.P. I -:.,.
18' -1"
t:EADER !5<J1fPI I f·
-4 X LP TO ,4' OFl=NINE> -4 X f> LP TO 6 OFl=NINEi -4 X l:1. LP TO fl OFl=NINEi

DOOR SCHEDULE

TAG I SIZE TYPE I MODEL I REMARKS
@i) 3'-Q" X 6'-8" HINGED VlNYL
@ 2'-6" X 6'-8" HINGED VlNYL @ 17'8"-0" X 6'-8" HINGED VlNYL

WINDOW SCHEDULE
SEE TYPICAL COOSTRUCllOII NOlES FOR ADDITIONAL \\INDOW INFORMATION TAG SIZE TYPE MANUF. MODEL REMARKS w X H
0 6'x3' SLIDING VINYL
3'x3' SLIDING VlNYL
<§> 8'x4' SLIDING VlNYL
<B> 6'x4' SLIDING VlNYL
<v 1 o'x5' SLIDING VlNYL
i> 4'x3' SLIDING VlNYL

EXISTING FLOOR PLAN
0 u
N
0 L
0 L
0 +-'
u
(I)
:r:

L
(I)
C
3::
0 -........._
+-'
C
0 u
Q_ Q_
<(
Q)
>0
<(°' -.:t-
~O)
w -
-c >u
>-_J
WW
_J<(
_J LL
<(<( > 0:::

A-2
EXISTING WALL $GFCI NEW WALL REF. NEW ATTACHED ADU (A= 702 SQ.FT.) 1 AB 2 3 PROPOSED ATTACHED ADU FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/4" = 1' SEE SHEET A-6 FOR PLAN NOTES DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 01.13.25 N N <O "' PORCH
13'-4"
PORCH
13'
.BEDROOM
·~•· CL F ~ i:=-=::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
. CL
••• • . .- . .-.-.. • .. • . .". '</)" ."
••• • . .- . .-.-. .- . .- . .-. z ·.-
• • • • • ·.-.-_g'_.:.,.a~-•
• • • • • BEDROOM
......... : :- : !:i- :-
1 ......... ·.·.· ... ·.·. ffi •r····.· ··· ··~·•• ..•.· •• ••••••••••••••• .• .. •.•.•.•.• . (@ ·.·· . . .
'---- I ........ .
. . .
. . . ..... .
. . . . . . . . . . . ...... .
••• • •• •••••••• <KitCHEN <••· > <••····•······ >•§)• >••· ••• > • "<o
I
"'
0 ...,
··• ·•··••Ld .. d[J~•···•"~ +--t--+t==-~=====i;:==t ,..L::::...::::...::::...=..:i...::::....=-.=-.=-.=-.=-. ::::...::::...::::...::...:_::...::c... ~~~~:,_E..::..::...=-.=.._i_:::_::_~:::_:":_~:__. 5..E,__::...::... =-.~=-=-=-=-=-:i..=-=-=-=-.=t1----------+ • 0
I
<t
N
GLASS
@JI
(E) GARAGE
29'-8"
•
I
;,.,

TAG I SIZE
@) 3'-Q" X 6'-8" @ 2'-6" X 6'-8"
:-: :-:-:-:-: :-: : :-:-:-: I
HEADfR 6Ctl:0 I f:
4 X '- LP TO ,V bf'ENINE':1 4 X & LP TO _,. bf'ENINE':1 4 X IZ LP TO &' bf'ENINE':1

DOOR SCHEDULE

I TYPE I MODEL I

HINGED HINGED

REMARKS
v1NYL v1NYL

WINDOW SCHEDULE
SEE TYPICAL CONSlRUCTION NOTES FOO ADDITIONAL YtllllOW INFORMATION TAG SIZE TYPE MANUF. MODEL REMARKS w X H
0 6'x4' SLIDING - - v1NYL
6'x5' SLIDING - - v1NYL
<§> 4'x4' SLIDING - - v1NYL <§> 3'x1' SLIDING - - v1NYL 0 3'x3' SLIDING - - v1NYL 0 3'x5' SLIDING - - v1NYL
U.F. SHGC
FOR NEW ~NOOWS
El EGJRICAL LfGENP
DUPLEX OUlLET I[])
I[]) DUPLEX OUlLET W/ GROUND FAULT
SWITCH
\ _,.- WIRING
-¢- CEILING/PENDANT LIGHT
<ll FAN WITH LIGHT

RECESS LIGHT
" r:ti:lBK:,IL trn@
1- El.UTRIUL ITcM5 st'UtlN 5ttf'MATJ,', ,W Tit
IN5T IU.ATION 6HIU.. llE RE\IIEM:D r,y Tit llll..DIOO
IN6f'Et.TOR IN Tit Fli.P.

1. IU. tlJll.EI" 6Pla\'EI, 'Elfl' ~6, P!Ni. taATION5
,W LDID 6HIU.. PERTANI00/1..iUL ure
~6.
'· N:W MNMM IOO !NP 61:RVla: f.e IN61" IU. FOR Tit
N:W D'M:LLINE':I PER tEC- 2/713.

PROPOSED FLOOR PLAN ADU
0 u
N
0 L
0 L
0 +-'
u
Q)
:r:

L
Q)
C
$'.
0 -........._
+-'
C
0 u
Q_ Q_
<(
Q)
>0
<(O) -.:t-
~O)
w -
-c >u
>-_J
WW
_J<(
_J LL
<(<( > 0:::

A-3
(STORAGE /LAUNDRY) EXISTING WALL 1 AB $GFCI NEW WALL PORCH CONVERSION = 63 SQ.FT. A ADDITION = 407 SQ.FT. SEE SHEET A-8 FOR PLAN NOTES DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 01.13.25 PROPOSED MAIN HOUSE FLOOR PLAN ' ; j • r---1 r--. 14'-5" 7'-1" (N) <$> ············· . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~. ··········· . . . . . .. •.•.• .. •.• .. •.•.•.• .. •.•.•.• .. ·.·.·.~ ···.·.··.·.·.·.· . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BAlH (E) PRIMARY BEDROOM " · ,:..;.........: • ' [3 ---::. 1)0 I I (E) BAlH - / ' r,: (E) LINEN r--"i t .:::J,: ==========i•C:.J (E) CL (E) HALL CL (E) BEDROOM (E) BEDROOM PRO\oiSIONS FO CL 12'-10" 11'-1" SC.ALE 1/4" = I' "' N G 1£VATOR CL 7'
"'
,------
ill
DECK 0
ill
a:, 0
-
0 ill
OJ
5 (E) CL
(E) KITCHEN
-[I
(E) HALL
g'
(N) FOYER/
@
(N)
(N) PORCH
-
..
= ·:·.

F
<B>
[2j
l
2'-7"
9'-4"
15'-5"
®
DINING
J 8'-8"
(E) LIVING
'
(lf)
12·-11·
18' -1"
.
. ' .. I

DOOR SCHEDULE

TAG I SIZE I TYPE I MODEL I REMARKS
@j) 3' -Q" X 6' -8" HINGED SOLID WOOD OR FlBER GLASS
@ 2°-6" X 6'-8" HINGED SOLID WOOD OR FlBER GLASS
® 2°-6" X 6'-8" BIFOLD SOLID WOOD OR FlBER GLASS
@) 2'-8" X 6' -8" HINGED SOLID WOOD OR FlBER GLASS
@ 3' -Q" X 6' -8" HINGED SOLID WOOD OR FlBER GLASS
l '

WINDOW SCHEDULE
SEE TIPICAI. CONSlRUCTION NOlES FOR ADDITIONAL YIINDOW INFORMATION TAG SIZE TYPE MANUF. MODEL REMARKS WxH
0 6'x3' SLIDING - - VlNYL OR FlBER GLASS
3'x3' SLIDING - - VINYL OR FIBER GLASS
<$> 8'x4' SLIDING - - VlNYL OR FlBER GLASS
61 x4' SLIDING - - VlNYL OR FlBER GLASS
0 1 o'x5' SLIDING - - VlNYL OR FlBER GLASS
.......... <€> 4'x3' SLIDING - - VlNYL OR FlBER GLASS
<B> 40"X24" SLIDING - - VlNYL OR FlBER GLASS
...
<B> 40"X60" SLIDING - - VlNYL OR FlBER GLASS
0 3'X4' SLIDING - - VlNYL OR FlBER GLASS 0 3'X5' CASEMENT - - VlNYL OR FlBER GLASS <B> 2'X5' CASEMENT - - VlNYL OR FlBER GLASS
2'-7"
I FOR NEW \\1NDOWS U.F. SHGC

PROPOSED

ELECTRICAL LEGEND
0 DUPLEX OUTLET 0 DUPLEX OUTLET W/ GROUND FAULT
SWITCH
\ ,,,.- WIRING
-¢- CEILING/PENDANT LIGHT
(5) FAN WllH LIGHT

RECESS LIGHT
I. EL.Et,l'RIUL ITI:M5 511/N/N !Of:MATii; 1W Tl1:

FLOOR
IN5r IU.ATJ(;N 61111.L llE R1:V1:'M:P f!>Y Tl1: IU.DINE':> IN6f'EC.Ti:R IN Tl1: FIELD.

IU. tllJll..Ef !:f'ACINE':>, 'E't'I' ~IREM:NT5, PAN:!.. L..OUruN5 1W L.OID Dl:MAi'D6 6HIU. M:l:r Pl:RTAININE'>/\,alt.. U're ~5.

JIEW MINM.M kW 1M' !cRVltE 6HIU. llE IN5f lU. Fi:R Tl1: JIEW Ka£/SORY 17MilN:> F1:R tfC. 202.2.

PLAN ADITION
0 u
N
0 L
0 L
0 &f::j~
+--'
u
Q)
:r:

Q)
L a~

C I CJ)
en
Q)
0 Q)
L >0 <(O) Q) -.:IC ~O)
$'. w -
0 -c
-........._
>u
+--' >-_J
C WW
0 _J<( _J LL u <(<( > 0:::

Q_ Q_ ~z
<( I"')<( ~lf)
A-4
EXISTING FRONT ELEVATION (SOUTH) DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 01.13.25 EXISTING REAR ELEVATION (NORTH) EXISTING RIGHT ELEVATION (EAST) EXISTING LEFT ELEVATION (WEST) • a, I 1,,-, EXISTING TYPICAL MATERIALS:

ROOF: COMPOSITION A SHINGLES
SIDING: WOOD SHINGLES AND STUCCO
WINDOWS: VINYL DUAL-PANE GLASS
EXTERIOR TRIM FOR WINDOWS: 4" WOOD TRIM
II

II I II II I II I II I II
l-t-'7'1-'-rht-'-n'-rht-'-trr'ht11hT"TTTlht-'7/rr'l".t"'T~ I lll-rr'-fl'rht'71T'T'/I D D Ill~
I I DDn•-~~---
%.ALE I/ 4" = I'

II II II II II II II II
%.ALE I/ 4" = I'
' a,
I
1,,-,
in
I
1,,-,
N
' a,
I
1,,-,
II
%.ALE: I/ 4" = I'

II II II
%.ALE: I/ 4" = I'
• a,
I
1,,-,
II II

EXISTING ELEVATIONS
0 u
N
0 L
0 L
0 +--'
u
Q)
:r:

L
Q)
C
$'.
0 -........._
+--'
C
0 u
Q_ Q_
<(
Q)
>0
<(O) -.:t-
~O)
w -
-c >u
>-_J
WW
_J<(
_J LL
<(<( > 0:::

A-5
NEW DECK DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 01.13.25 PROPOSED FRONT ELEVATION (SOUTH) PROPOSED REAR ELEVATION (NORTH) "-l!.i:!r,!l,rnlt,w l~l
-
• 0,
I
;.-,
'·
•.
.,
..

DD
I
·· ..
• '
~J;..
"
' ...
'
I
.. ·.·
I .
•. '
' II
" : '
'
.
"
11 11
II II
I
"
I
.. . _ .. l'-/n¥-rl--+r'T'II-I
111 II 1111 II 111 II I 11 I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I 11
I I I
" " " ·.• " " " " " " : .... " " "
•·
·, ·:· .: •.
.· .
·. ,·.
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '' ' ' I I I, I I I I I I I I I I I '' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '' ' ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I '' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '' ' ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I '' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '' ' ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I '' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' I 1111 II 111 II 111 II 1111
I
I
I I
I I I
" " " " " " " " " " " "
..
.- ·:-. ·'
·,
' . '
'
' ' , .
. '
'· '
I

I , , I I , I , I , I , I , I , I , I I , '
' I I I I I I I I I I '
, I , I , I , I , I , I, I , '' '
., II ' ' ' " '
II 1111 II 1111 II 1111
, .... '.··
I .,
.,
.: ...
-1 Ji1' 1 - ' l J I:, ,.,
. l
II
' l l l
I
I 11 11 111 II 1111 II 111
I I I II I I 11 II II I
~ I
'
I
I
.,
I
I
"
..

I
·.'. "
'
%ALE: I/ 4" = I'
' " '
II 1111 II I
[I]
I
1 II I
I
I
'.'
"
%ALE: I/ 4" = I'
I I
. .---·
•• : .. . '
.
.. -·
I
..
,, .. -· .· > '.·
[I] <·
.... ' . :;;_.
' •
.. · ..

I I •.
"
PROPOSED TYPICAL MATERIALS (MATCH EXISTING):

ROOF: COMPOSITION A SHINGLES
SIDING: WOOD SHINGLES AND STUCCO
WINDOWS: VINYL DUAL-PANE GLASS
EXTERIOR TRIM FOR WINDOWS: 4" WOOD TRIM
' '

I I I I I I I I ' '

I I I I I I
' ' ' I I , I I
'
·_·, .
. • 0,
I
;,, 0
u
N
0 L
..
0 L
's;[ I >-I I I,,'
0 i
.-
+--' N u .---
Q) .---
:r: I
a t"J L 0 Q) r---
C I CJ) 0
en .---
Q) LO
0 Q)
L >0 <(O) Q) -.:IC ~O)
$'. w
0 -c
-.......__
>u
+--' >-_J
C WW
0 _J<( _J LL
u <(<( > 0:::

Q_ Q_ ~z
<( I"')<( ~lf)
''
' ' I I I I I
' '' I , , I , I , I , I , I , I , I , I I
'
A-6

PROPOSED ELEVATIONS
DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 01.13.25 PROPOSED RIGHT ELEVATION (EAST) PROPOSED LEFT ELEVATION (WEST) -I "'

I I I I I
, I , I, I, I I

I I I I
I
' ' ' ' I , I , I , I , ' ' I I I I
. I ·l'-fTY/-.+'-nY'ht"-h'-rl-;/-"'-/,Y, l'-;-1-','lrY/ 1--.1-'-nl'Yl-.+'-hlY/-,-/-'-;/rY,'-I I "
. I
%ALE 1/4"
I
' '
'
'
~J:..- I I I I I I I I I I I I '' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '' I I I I I I I I I I I I I '' ' ' ' ' ' '' I I I I I I I I I I I I I '' ' '
I
••... • \-' I
:. !
L
' I , , I , , I , I , I , , , I , I , , I
' ' I I I I I I I I I '
I I I I I I I I I I I I ' ' ' ' , , I I , I , I , I , I , I , I , I , I , I I , , I I ' ' I ! I I I I I ! ! ' ' I
I
".
~-['""']""T""T""T""T .. _T"".".---,-,""T""T .. ,..,. ,. -,---,-,.,-,,,~..,...,-,--,--•. -,- , . ..,...,.-, -,- . ·..,. ·,.,..,. . .....,,......,,.,,.,,...,...,..: ,._.....,,. ,:,·,.... •· -·: .....,,.,..,.,.,..~--,--:r....,.,.,,..,.. :- :< . . ·'· .,, :·.,. ..
.-:- ,,.-
..,._.
'.,;,,
._., ..
•. -,
.. ,, .. ' • ' ,: :.: ":. ·., "_._-"
I
I
I>
,•,
. :
,._ -.

II
= 1·
I
%ALE I/ 4" = I'
I
I I
I
I I
_,. ...
-,.··
,,
_,.; .

PROPOSED TYPICAL MATERIALS (MATCH EXISTING):

ROOF: COMPOSITION A SHINGLES
SIDING: WOOD SHINGLES AND STUCCO
WINDOWS: VINYL DUAL-PANE GLASS
EXTIERIOR TRIM FOR WINDOWS: 4" WOOD TRIM
' ' , I , I , I , I , I , I , ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' I , I , I , I , I , I , I , I , ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' , I , I , I , I , I , I , I , I ' '' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' I
0 u
N
0 I0 I0
i
..
·. .-
+-' N u
.---
Q) .---
:r: I
a t"J I- 0 Q) r---
C I CJ) 0 en .---
Q) LO
0 Q)
I- >0 <(O) Q) -.:IC ~O)
$'. w
0 -c
-........._
>u
+-' >-_J
C WW
0 _J<( _J LL
u <(<( > 0:::

Q_ Q_ ~z
<( I"')<( ~lf)
' .t ' ' I I I I I I I I ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' I I I I I I I I I I I ' '' ' ' ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ' I I
I 111 II I
I I I
I
I
I 7
I I I II 1 1 I
"'-1..11--11~
-
'.- ,•. :
·'
. .,.
--
:
. :, -., .
. . , ..... .
·..:.·
. ......

A-7

PROPOSED ELEVATIONS
EXTERIOR WALL GAPS: annular spaces around pipes, electric cables, conduits or openinings in sole/bottom plates at exterior walls shall be closed with cement mortar, concrete masonry or a similar method acceptable to the enforcing agency to prevent passage of rodents. LAUNDRY: a. conductor wires with an installed neutral and a four-prong outlet are required for dryers and cooking units. b. provide one minimum seperate 20 amp circuit to laundry appliances. c. vent dryer w/smooth metal duct to ext. w/backdraft damper. duct to be 4" min. dia.; 14' max length w/2 elbows provide one minimum seperate 20 amp circuit to laundry appliances. d. termination of all environmental air ducts shall be a minimum of 3 feet from property lines or openings into the building (i.e. dryers, bath and utility fans etc. must be 3 feet away from doors, windows, opening skylights or attic vents) e. laundry room lighting: all lights shall be fluorescent or controlled by an occupant sensor. f. installation instuctions for all listed equipment shall be provided to the field inspector at time of inspection. g. provide a 220 volt gfi electrical receptacle h. where a closet is designed for the installation of clothes dryer, an opening of not less than 100 square inches for makeup air shall be provided in the door. SMOKE DETECTORS: new 110v smoke detectors (with battery backup) which are audible in all sleeping areas & at the following locations: 1. hallways leading to bedrooms; 2. above tops of stairs; 3. at least one every level and any area where ceiling height is more than 24" above hallway ceiling leading to sleeping room. all smoke detectors are to be interconnected per 2022 CRC R-314.4 (activation of one alarm will activate all of the alarms in the individual unit & alarm will be clearly audible in all bedrooms over background noise levels with all intervening doors closed) GUARD RAILS: guardrail req'd at walking surface 30" or more above grade. guardrail height shall be min. 42" high with intermediate rails such that 4" sphere shall not pass through. guardrail & connection shall be capable of resisting 20 plf horiz. load perpendicular to top rail and intermediate rails, panel filters and their connections shall be capable of withstanding a load of at least 25 pounds per square foot applied horizontally at right angles ofver the entire tributary area, including openings and spaces between rails. ATTIC ACCESS PANEL: R807.1: 22"x30" min. panel (size larger to accomodate fau as req'd) located in hallway or other readily accessible location. if FAU in attic, provide 30" min deep platform in front of firebox & lighting outlet switched at access door near furnace. PRESSURE TREATED WOOD: to be used for wood in contact w/earth or embedded in concrete or masonry. 6" min. clear from grade to framing LANDINGS: Provide 36" deep landing outside all exterior doors (not more than 7-3/4" lower than threshold for in-swinging doors and not more than 1/2" lower than threshold for outswinging doors; min. 1/4" slope for weather exposed landings; balconies and roof decks sealed underneath DOOR TO GARAGE: door between garage & house to be self-closing; tight-fitting solid wood door 1-3/8" thick or approved 20 min. fire-rated door 1-HR WALL BETWEEN GARAGE & LIVING SPACE: 5/8" type x gyp. bd garage side; 2x6 wd studs @ 16" o.c. w/R-19 batt insul; 1/2" gyp bd @ house side. 1-hr clg btween garage & house: 2 layers 5 8" type X gyp. bd. garage side (fasten per CBC Table 7-C item 21-1.1) Fire separation shall extend through ceiling to the underside of roof sheathing. HOSE BIBS: provide a non-removable backflow prevention device on all new exterior hose bibs, and lawn sprinkler/irrigation systems. All hose bibs must have approved anti-siphon device SLOPE OF GRADE: The grade shall fall a minimum of 6 inches within the first 10 feet (5%).where lot lines prohibit 6" of fall within 10', drains or swales shall be constructed to ensure drainage away from the structure. WATERPROOF/GFCI PROTECTED OUTLETS: at exterior at front and rear of dwelling having access to grade and at all balconies; decks; and porches greater than 20 SFWATER HEATER: a. seismic anchorage of water heater include 3 anchors or straps at points within the to upper and lower one-third of its vertical dimension-the lower anchor/strap located to maintain a minimum distance of 4 inches above the controls b. pressure relief valve with drain a minimum distance of 4 inches above the controls c provide 24 inch minimum wide door to water heater compartment; min 30" x 30" workspace by firebox d. dwh location prohibited in bdrm; bathrm; clothes clst; or area open to same except direct vent appliance e. if located over framing; requires watertight pan w/1" drain f. externally wrapped with min. R-12 insulation ATTIC VENTILATION: vent 1 s.f./150 s.f. of attic area or 1 s.f./300 s.f. if >50% of venting is located above mid-point of attic per 2022 CRC. CRAWLSPACE VENTILATION: vent 1 s.f./150 s.f. of underfloor area: U.O.N., provide painted 6"x16" G.S.M. vents as close to corners as possible and allowing cross-ventilation. Vents shall be covered with 1 4" wire mesh UNDER-FLOOR CLEARANCE: provide min. 18" clear to exposed ground in crawlspaces from joists or structural wood floors or 12" to wood girders. Otherwise, such wood framing shall be pressure-treated or have natural resistance to decay. CRAWLSPACE ACCESS: Provide min. 18"x24" crawlspace access panel. Ventilation 1 s.f./150 s.f. of crawl space area. ADDRESS NUMBERS: Show location of address numbers on building elevations clearly visible from adjacent access street or road. numbers to be min. 4" high with min. stroke with of 1/2" and shall contrast with the background ARC-FAULT CIRCUIT INTERRUPTER: at all branch circuits that supply 120 volt, single-phase, 15 and 20 ampere receptacle outlets installed in all dwelling unit rooms and kitchens, except bathrooms and garages. CEC 210.12 TOILET: max.1.28 gal. per flush; min. 30" width clearance; min 24" front clearance; fixture centered min 15" from side; caulk & seal fixture where it meets floor. STAIRS: conform to a. 1 1 4"-2" diameter handrail mounted 34 to 38in. above the tread nosing. required at all stairs with 4 or more risers)-return at ends b. handrails shall be mounted so that the completed rail and supporting structure are capable of withstanding a load of at least 200 pounds applied in any direction at any point on the rail. cbc-table 16-b, foot note 9. c. headroom min. 6'8" abv stair treads d. handrail projection max. 3.5" into req'd stair width. stringers and other projections are limited to 1-1/2" projection each side. e. rise & run of stairs (max. rise 7-3/4"; min. run 10") f. handrail required at stairs with two or more risers; handrail both sides required at ext stairs; handrail at one side allowed at int. stairs g. at ext. stairs; handrails to extend 12" horiz at top and extend one tread length at bottom of run & return to adj. wall or post EGRESS WINDOW: 5.7 sq. ft. min. (5 sq. ft. min. allowable at ground level); 20" wide by 24" high; max. 44" to finished sill' opens directly to public way; yard or court that opens to a public way SAFETY (TEMPERED) GLAZING: at: (1) hazardous locations-windows adjacent to: tubs, showers, and tub/showers (2) adjacent to and within 24 inches of either edge of doors (3) glazing less than 60" above walking surface at stairways or landings (4) windows within 5' horiz. from tub/shower unless btm of glazing >60" abv. standing surface of tub/shower. CARBON MONOXIDE ALARMS: (Sec:R315) new 110v carbon monoxide alarm (with battery backup) installed in each bedroom, and outside each area adjacent to a sleeping area; each story of the building; and in any basement SHOWER/TUB: • showerhead 1.8 gal. per min. max. a. shower stalls shall be a minimum finished interior of 1,024 square inches, be capable of encompassing a 30" diameter circle, and any doors shall swing out of the enclosure have a clear opening of 22" minimum. (cpc 411.6 and 411.7) b. glazing in any portion of the shower, bathtub, or hydro-massage tub enclosure shall be safety glazing (i.e. tempered glass) when the bottom edge of the glazing is less than 50" above the standing surface of the unit. (cbc 2406.3 and crc r308.4) c. shower stalls and bathtubs with shower heads installed, shall have walls finished with a non-absorbent surface for a minimum of 6' above the floor. d. any new or replaced mixing valve in a shower (including over a tub) shall be pressure balancing set at a maximum 120° f. any new or replaced water-filler valve in bathtubs/whirlpools shall have a temperature limiting device set at a maximum of 120° e. the water heater thermostat cannot be used to meet the these provisions. (cpc 414.0 and 418.0) f. hydro-massage tubs (i.e. jacuzzi tubs) shall have motor access, a gfci protected dedicated circuit, and be ul listed. all metal cables, fittings, piping, or other metal surfaces, within 5' of the inside wall of the hyrdo-massage tub shall be properly bonded. hydro-massage tubs shall be bonded g.materials used as backers for wall tile in tub and shower areas and wall panels inshower areas shall be glass mat gypsum panel, fiber-reinforced gypsum panels,non-asbestos fiber-cement backer board, or non-asbestos fiber-cement reinforced cementitious backer units installed in accordance with manufacturers' recommendations. [r702.4.2] h.water-resistant gypsum board shall not be installed over a class i or ii vaporretarder in a shower or tub compartment. [r702.3.7] water resistant gypsumbacking board shall not be used where there will be direct exposure to water, or inareas subject to continuous high humidity. [r702.3.7.1] BATHROOM: a. all receptacles shall be gfci protected & tamper resistant. new/additional outlets shall have a dedicated 20-amp circuit. (cec 406.11, 210.8, 210.11) b. provide energy star compliant mechanical ventilation system capable of providing 5 air changes/hr-mechanical , 50 cfm minimum; exhaust fans are required in all bathrooms, even if an operable window is installed. exhaust fans and lighting shall have separate control switches (even if a combination unit is installed). the exhaust fan may need to be supplied by a gfi protected circuit based on the manufacturer's requirements, and shall be control with an accesible humidistat ( CGBSC Section 4.506.1) c. termination of all environmental air ducts shall be a minimum of 3 feet from property lines or openings into the building (i.e. dryers, bath and utility fans etc. must be 3 feet away from doors, windows, opening skylights or attic vents) with dampers. d. lighting fixtures located within 3' horizontally and 8' vertically of the bathtub rim or shower stall threshold shall be listed for a damp location, or listed for wet locations where subject to shower spray. (cec 410.10) e. Lighting shall be high efficiency fixtures (e.g. fluorescent, led). At least one luminaire shall be controlled with an occupant sensor with controls that do not allow the fixtures to be automatically turned on or allow the fixture to be always on f. maximum flow for bathroom faucet to be 1.20 gallon/minute g.materials used as backers for wall tile in tub and shower areas and wall panels inshower areas shall be glass mat gypsum panel, fiber-reinforced gypsum panels,non-asbestos fiber-cement backer board, or non-asbestos fiber-cement reinforced cementitious backer units installed in accordance with manufacturers' recommendations. [r702.4.2] h.water-resistant gypsum board shall not be installed over a class i or ii vaporretarder in a shower or tub compartment. [r702.3.7] water resistant gypsumbacking board shall not be used where there will be direct exposure to water, or inareas subject to continuous high humidity. [r702.3.7.1] KITCHEN: a. conductor wires with an installed neutral and a four-prong outlet are required for dryers and cooking units. b. provide two separate 20amp circuits for kitchen small appliances, with no other outlets on the circuits. c. termination of all environmental air ducts shall be a minimum of 3 feet from property lines or openings into the building (i.e. dryers, bath and utility fans etc. must be 3 feet away from doors, windows, opening skylights or attic vents) d. kitchen lighting: all permanently installed lighting shall be high efficacy. e. installation instuctions for all listed equipment shall be provided to the field inspector at time of inspection. f. gfci protection at all receptacles serving kitchen counter tops; receptacles within 6 feet of a wet bar sink; at each kitchen and dining area counter space wider than 12 inches. locate so that no point along the counter wall is over 24" from a receptacle. all receptacles to be tamper resistant g. maximum flow for kitchen faucet to be 1.8 gallon/minute h. all under cabinet lighting must be switched separately from other lighting in the home. i.electric range in a dwelling under 750 square feet, the hood capacity must be 160 cfm, or a 65 % capture efficiency. the gas-powered range hood in a dwelling under 750 square feet, the hood capacity must be 280 cfm, or an 85 % capture efficiency (ce). [cenc table150.0-g, cenc 150.0(o)g.1] CLOSETS: Lighting in clothes closet shall be fully glass enclosed or flourescent fixture. HOT WATER PIPING: Minimum 1" thick pipe insulation shall be installed on all accesible hot water piping. OUTDOOR LIGHTING: Outdoor lighting permanently mounted to a dwelling or other buildings on the same parcel shall be high efficacy and be controlled by onf of the following combinations: a. photocell and motion sensor b. photocell and time switch c. astronomical time clock d. EMCS with features of astronomical time clock, does not allow the luminarie to be ON during the day, and may be programmed to automatically turn lighting off at night. MEMBRANE PENETRATIONS: Membrane penetrations of fire-resistance assemblies shall comply with 2022 CBC section 714.3.2 Membrane penetrations of fire resistance rated assemblies shall be protected by and approved penetration firestop system. Exceptions. A. Membrane penetration of fire resistance rated walls by steel electrical boxes that do not exceed 16 square inches in area provided that the aggregate area of the openings through the membrane does not exceed 100 square inches in any 100 square feet of wall area. such boxes on opposite sides of the wall shall be separated by on of the following: -By a horizontal distance of not less than 24" where the wall is constructed with individual non communicating stud cavities. -By solid fireblocking -By protecting both boxes with approved listed putty pads. B. Membrane penetrations of fire resistance rated walls by listed electrical boxes provided that the boxes have been tested for use in fire resistance rated assemblies and are installed in accordance with the instruction included in the listing. Such boxes on opposite sides of the wall shall be separated by on of the following: -By the horizontal distance specified in the listing of the electrical boxes. -By solid fireblocking. -By protecting both boxes with listed putty pads. INDOOR LIGHTING: Indoor lighting for new homes and remodels must be high efficacy. The definition of "high efficacy luminaires" includes all light sources identified as "efficient" under the 2016 Standards. This includes linear flourescent; pin based compact flourescent, GU-24 base CFL, HID, and induction. High efficacy products include any luminaire that contains a JA8-compliant lamp or other light source. In other words, any luminaire can qualigy as high efficacy as long as it meets with the requirements of Section 150.0(k) and Joint Appendix JA8. WATER EFFICIENT PLUMBING FIXTURES FIRE STOPPING VENT TO BE PROVIDED, TYP. BRAND : brandguard or approved equal per r337.6 (see note #6 in fire high severity zone requirements section on sheet a5.1 STORAGE UNDER STAIRS: Provide 5 8" type x gyp bd under stairs at storage area, typ. MOISTURE BARRIER: Vapor retarder shall be a 6-mil polyethylene or approved vapor retarder with joints lapped not less than 6 inches shall be placed between the concrete floor slab and prepared 4 inch thick subgrade consisting of gravel, crushed stone or crushed concrete (crc r506.2.3). exception: subgrade is not required when the soil condition is of silty sand, sand-silt mixture (crc table r405.1). approvable methods: 1.icc esr#1413 – redgard waterproofing and crack prevention membrane, ccure pro-red waterproofing membrane 963, cbp 232 waterproofing and antifracture membrane, and jambo waterproofing membrane 2.icc esr #2417 – laticrete hydro ban 3.icc esr #2785 – polycoat-aquatight and flexideck 4. icc esr#3474 – mapelastic aquadefense waterproofing membrane HVAC CONDENSER: a.where equipment or appliances that require service are located on a roof with a 4:12or steeper slope, a level platform not less than 30"x30" must be provided at theservice side. [cmc 304.2] b.if in the attic, please note that a permanent 120-volt receptacle outlet and a lightingfixture shall be installed near the appliance. [cmc 304.4] c.if in the garage, please provide protection for the appliance or elevate the unit so it isout of the normal path of vehicles. [cmc 305.1.1] d.if outdoors, a compressor or portion of acondensing unit supported from the ground shall rest of a concrete or other approvedbase extending not less than 3 inches above the adjoining ground level. [cmc1105.2] e.outdoor condensing units shall have a clearance of at least 5 feet from the outlet of any dryer vent. [cenc 150.0(h)3a] WINDOWS REQUIREMENTS ALL HOUSE VENTILATION: M.E.P. GENERAL NOTES The exhaust fan in the house are required to remain on all times the building is occupied but can have an overirde control like a typical manual wall switch to turn fan off when necessary with the following: a. Whole house fans shall have a maximum of 1.0 sone sound rating, with a minum 100 cfm. HVAC contractor to provide and calculate system requirements. b. On the wall above switch, a label is required that states someting like "ventilation control" or "Operate Exhaust Fan when home is occupied" c. Whole house fans shall have insulated louvers or covers which close when the fan is off. Covers or louvers shall have a minimum insulation value of R4.2. d. Identify the exhaust or supply fans that are part of the mechanical ventilation system provides the appropriate ventilation rate. e. fan switch shall have a label reading the following: "this switch controls the indoor air quality ventilation for the home. leave it on unless the outdoor air quality is very poor." GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT AT BATHROOMS: At least one bathroom shall be provided with grab bar reinforcement for thewater closet, bathtub, and shower. Reinforcement shall be 2x8 nominal lumber. Reinforcement shall be locatedbetween 32" and 39-1/4" above the finished floor. Water closet reinforcement shall be installed on both side wallsof the fixture, or one side wall and the back wall. Where the water closet is not placed adjacent to a side wall capable of accommodating a grab bar, the bathroom shall have provisions for installation of floor-mounted,foldaway or similar alternate grab bar reinforcements. Shower reinforcement shall be continuous where wall framing is provided. Bathtub and combination bathtub/shower reinforcement shall be continuous on each end of the bathtub and the back wall. Additionally, back wall reinforcement for a lower grab bar shall be provided with the bottom edge located no more than 6" above the bathtub rim. (crcr327.1.1) DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 01.13.25 PLAN NOTES @ CD 0 @ 03) @ @ (gas storage-tank type) @ -
@)
®
I
@
@
@
(3)
®
(j)
® I ®
@
@)
@ @

EMERGENCY ESCAPE 'MNPOWS

IN BEDROOMS PROVIDE OPERABLE ESCAPE WINDOWS (AT LEAST ONE IN EACH BEDROOM) MEETING ALL OF THE FOLLOWING:
- A NET CLEAR OPENABLE AREA NOT LESS THAN 5.7 SF
A MINIMUM CLEAR OPENING HEIGHT OF 24".

A MINIMUM CLEAR OPENING WIDTH OF 20"
A SILL HEIGHT NOT OVER 44" ABOVE THE FLOOR.

NAJURAL LIGHT AND VENTILATION REQUIREMENTS

EACH HABITABLE ROOM (EXCLUDES HALLWAYS, BATHROOMS, AND LAUNDRY ROOMS) IS REQUIRED TO HAVE:
- NATURAL LIGHT (WINDOWS OR SKYLIGHTS) SIZED TO A MINIMUM OF 8% OF THE FLOOR AREA

OF THE ROOM
- VENTILATION (OPENABLE PORTION OF WINDOW OR SKYLIGHT) SIZED TO A MINIMUM OF 4% OF THE FLOOR AREA.

SAFETY GLAZING-WINDOWS
- GLAZING LESS THAN 60" ABOVE THE DRAIN INLET IN HOT TUBS, WHIRLPOOLS, SAUNAS, SlEAM ROOMS, BATHTUBS AND SHOWERS SHALL BE lEMPERED.
- GLAZING IN FIXED OR OPENABLE PANELS ADJACENT TO A DOOR, WHERE THE NEAREST EXPOSED EDGE OF THE GLAZING IN WITHIN A 24" ARC OF EITHER VERTICAL EDGE OF THE DOOR IN A CLOSED POSITION AND WHERE THE BOTTOM EXPOSED EDGE IS LESS THAN 60" ABOVE THE WALKING SURFACE, SHALL BE lEMPERED.

GLAZING IN WALLS ENCLOSING STAIRWAY LANDINGS OR WITHIN 5 FEET OF THE BOTTOM AND TOP STAIRWAYS WHERE THE BOTTOM EDGE OF THE GLASS IS LESS THAN 60" ABOVE A WALKING SURFACE SHALL lEMPERED. - GLAZING IN INDIVIDUAL FIXED OR OPERABLE WINDOWS SHALL BE SAFETY TYPE IF THE WINDOW IN QUESTION MEETS OF THE FOLLOWING CONDmONS:
- THE EXPOSED AREA OF THE INDMDUAL PANE IS GREATER THAN 9 SQUARE FEET. - THE EXPOSED BOTTOM EDGE IS LESS THAN 18" ABOVE THE FLOOR. - THE EXPOSED TOP EDGE IS GREAlER THAN 36" ABOVE THE FLOOR. - THERE ARE ONE OR MORE WALKING SURFACES WITHIN 36" HORIZONTALLY OF THE PLANE OF THE GLAZING.

TYPE OF FIXTURE

WATER CLOSET
(TOILET)

SHOWERHEAD
FAUCET

BATHROOM

FAUCET KITCHEN
REQUIRED WATER-CONSERV1NG PLUMBING
FlXTURE (MAXIMUM FLOW-RATES)

1.28 GALLONS/FLUSH

1.8 GALLONS/MINUTE AT 8DPSI

1.2 GALLONS/MINUTE AT 60 PSI 1.8 GALLONS/MINUTE AT 60 PSI (AVERAGE)

1. 2.

3. 4.

5. 6.

7. 8.

9. ALL MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL WORK TO BE DESIGNED BUILD, INFORMATION PROVIDED FOR REFERENCE ONLY. DUCT OPENINGS AND OTHER RELAlED AIR DISTRIBUTION COMPONENT OPENINGS SHALL BE

COVERED DURING CONSTRUCTION
HVAC SYSlEM INSTALLERS SHALL BE TRAINED AND CERTIFIED IN THE PROPER INSTALLATION OF HVAC SYSlEMS.

PROVIDE INSULATION FOR THE HOT WAlER SUPPLY FROM THE WATER HEAlER TO THE KITCHEN FAUCET
PROVIDE GROUND-FAULT CIRCUIT INlERRUPTERS FOR RECEPTACLES INSTALLED AT BATHROOM AND KITCHEN COUNlERTOP SURFACES.

AT THE KITCHEN, PROVIDE 2-20 AMP CIRCUITS FOR SMALL APPLIANCES AND A 15 AMP DEDICAlED CIRCUIT FOR THE REFRIGERATOR. INDEPENDENTLY, PROVIDE SEPARAlE CIRCUITS FOR LIGHTING, APPLIANCE RECEPTACLES, HOOD FANS, DISHWASHERS AND DISPOSALS.

ALL PERMANENTLY INSTALLED LU MIN AIRES IN KITCHENS SHALL BE HIGH EFFICACY LUMINAIRES, AS SPECIFIED IN §150.0(k)l
LIGHT FIXTURES RECESSED INTO INSULATED CEILINGS SHALL BE LISlED FOR ZERO CLEARANCE INSULATION CONTACT.

SMOKE DETECTORS SHALL BE INSTALLED IN EXISTING BEDROOMS, IN HALLWAYS, AND WITHIN EACH STORY. WHEN DWELLING HAS FUEL-BURNING APPLIANCES OR ATTACHED GARAGE: INSTALL CARBON MONOXIDE ALARM IN HALLWAYS ADJOINING SLEEPING AREAS AT EACH LEVEL. SMOKE DElECTORS AND CARBON MONOXIDE ALARMS SHALL RECEIVE THEIR PRIMARY POWER FROM THE BUILDING WIRING AND BA TlERY BACKUP.

10. ALL PERMANENTLY INSTALLED LU MIN AIRES IN BATHROOM SHALL BE HIGH EmCACY LUMINAIRES, AS SPECIFIED IN §150.0(k)1

11. BATHROOM RECEPTACLES SHALL BE INSTALLED ON A DEDICAlED 20-AMPERE BRANCH CIRCUIT THAT IS:
- DEDICATED TO ONLY BATHROOM RECEPTACLES OR, - DEDICATED TO THE RECEPTACLES AND LIGHTING WITHIN A SINGLE BATHROOM ONLY.

12. SURFACE MOUNlED LIGHTING FIXTURES IN CLOSETS SHALL BE 18" FROM STORAGE AREAS. FLUSH MOUNTED SHALL BE 6" AWAY.

13. ALL RECEPTACLES, LIGHTING CIRCUITS, SWITCHES AND HARD WIRED SMOKE DElECTORS INSTALLED IN ROOMS OTHER THAN KITCHEN, SHALL BE PROTEClED WITH AN ARC FAULT CIRCUIT INlERRUPTER.

14. ALL RECEPTACLES SHALL BE TAMPER RESISTANCE IN ACCORDANCE TO 2022 CEC 15. EXHAUST FANS WITH INlEGRAL LIGHTING SYSlEM SHALL BE SWITCHES SEPARATELY FROM LIGHTING SYSTEM OR HA VE A LIGHTING SYSlEM THAT CAN BE MANUALLY TURNED ON AND OFF WHILE ALLOWING THE FAN TO CONTINUE TO OPERAlE FOR AN EXTENDED PERIOD OF TIME. LIGHTING INlEGRAL TO AN EXHAUST FAN MUST BE HIGH-EFFICACY.

16. EACH BATHROOM IS REQUIRED TO HAVE A 50 CFM MINIMUM EXHAUST FAN DUClED TO THE OUTSIDE. BATHROOM IS ANY ROOM WITH A BATHTUB, SHOWER, SPA OR SIMILAR SOURCES OF MOISTURE. TOILET ROOM IS NOT CONSIDERED A BATHROOM.

17. NOT USED

18. LOCAL EXHAUST FANS ARE REQUIRED TO BE RAlED FOR SOUND AT A MAXIMUM OF 3 SONES, UNLESS THEIR MAXIMUM RAlED AIRFLOW EXCEEDS 400 CFIM.

19. PROVIDE ONE 20A DEDICATED CIRCUIT FOR THE RECEPTACLE OUTLETS FOR THE LAUNDRY ROOM.

THE 20A LAUNDRY ROOM RECEPTACLE CIRCUIT CAN SUPPLY MORE THAN ONE RECEPTACLE IN THE LAUNDRY ROOM. THIS RECEPTACLE CAN NOT SUPPLY OTHER OUTLETS, SUCH AS THE LAUNDRY ROOM LIGHTING OR RECEPTACLES IN OTHER ROOMS. GFCI PROlECTION IS NOT REQUIRED FOR 15A AND 20A, 125V RECEPTACLES IN A LAUNDRY ROOM, UNLESS THEY ARE WITHIN 6 FT OF A SINK.

20. EXHAUST DUCTS FOR DRYER SHALL 1ERMINA1E ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE BUILDING AND NOT LESS THAN 3 FEET IN ANY DIRECTION FROM OPENINGS INTO BUILDINGS. DUCT lERMINATION SHALL BE

EQUIPED WITH A BACKDRAFT DAMPER

21. LIGHTING CONTROL FOR KITCHEN, DINING, FAMILY, LIVING, AND BEDROOMS SHALL BE ON DIMMERS.

22. LIGHTING CONTROL FOR GARAGE, LAUNDRY, BATHROOMS, AND STORAGE SHALL BE ON VACANCY SENSORS.

23. EXlERIOR LIGHTS SHALL BE ON TIMERS OR PHOTO SENSORS. 24. GFI RECEPTACLE FOR EACH PARKING SPACE.

25. PROVIDE EARTHQUAKE SHUTOFF VALVE

26. ALL LIGHTS THROUGHOUT THE RESIDENCE, INCLUDING THE GARAGE AND EXlERIOR, SHALL BE HIGH EFFICACY.

27. LIGHTING IN ALL HABITABLE SPACES SHALL HAVE DIMMER CONTROLS (ENERGY CODE 150.0(K)2F)

28. ELECTRICAL RECEPTACLE OUTLETS, SWITCHES AND CONTROLS INlENDED TO BE USED BY OCCUPANTS, SHALL BE LOCATED NO MORE THAN 48" MEASURED FROM THE TOP OF THE OUTLET BOX AND NOT LESS THAN 15"MEASURED FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE OUTLET BOX ABOVE THE FINISH FLOOR. (CRC 327.1.2)

29. AT THE KITCHEN ISLAND, A MINIMUM OF ONE GFI/AFCI PROTEClED ELECTRICAL RECEPTACLE SHALL BE INSTALLED AT KITCHEN ISLAND COUNlERTOPS WITH A SURFACE AREA OF 9 SQUARE FEET OR LESS. FOR ISLAND COUNlER TOPS WITH AN AREA OF MORE THAN 9 SQUARE FEET, AN ADDITIONAL ELECTRICAL RECEPTACLE SHALL BE INSTALLED FOR EVERY ADDITIONAL 18 SQUARE FEET OF COUNTERTOP SURFACE AREA. TWO ELECTRICAL RECEPTACLES ARE REQUIRED. (CEC 210.52(C)(2))

PLAN NOTES
0 u
N
0 L
0 L
0 &f::j~
+-'
u
Q)
:r:
. . a~ L Q)

C I CJ)
·-
en
Q)
0 Q)
L >0 <(O) Q) -.:IC ~O)
$'. w
-
0 -c
-........._
>u
+-' >-_J
C WW
0 _J<( _J LL u <(<( ·-- > 0:::

Q_ I Q_ I ~z
<( I I"'")<( ~lf)
A-8
PROPOSED ROOF PLAN DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 01.13.25 <c- D OS <c- D <c- D 0 D <c- '""
I
DS •
I
t
<c- 0 Cl Cl Cl

DI DI DI
()
Q
OS
SC-Al.£: I/ 4" = I'
I
"'
RIDGE OR VALJ.£Y
DIRECTION OF WAlER FLOW (SLOPE)
DOWN SPOUT (!JDS
ROOF' LOU~ vans
e· x us·
I I
ADU ATTIC VENTILATION CALCULATION ATTIC AREA TO BE VEN Tl LA TIED = 232 SF REQUIRED VENTILATION AREA = 1,815 SF / 150 SF = 12.10 SF PROVIDED ATTIC VENTILATION AREA:
- ROOF VENTS = (19) X 0.66 = 12.54
- GABLE VENT = (0) X 0.66 = 0.00
TOTAL = 12.54 SF
Tl-lEREFORE TOTAL PROVIDED VENTILATION AREA IS MORE THAN REQUIRED

ROOF PLAN
0 u
N
0 L
0 L
0 &f::j~
+-'
u
Q)
:r:
a~ L Q)
C I CJ) en
Q)
0 Q)
L >0 <(O) Q) -.:IC ~O)
$'. w
-
0 -c
-........._
>u
+-' >-_J
C WW _J<( 0 _J LL u <(<( > 0:::

Q_ Q_ ~z
<( I"')<( ~lf)
A-9
& SECTIONS
WATER LEGEND EXISTING SEWER NEW SEWER VALLEY VIEW Ave. DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 01.13.25 r \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ EXISTING A \ PARCEL DJECENT \ (E) GAS MEj, ~/SHUTtFt I ALVE \ \ \ \ \ L -
-
-
(E) WATER METER

EXISTING PARCEL ADJECENT
w.
z
::J
BS
>-
<( "' :r:
u.
z
T
•
PANEL
-
PORCH
-
-
-
-

UTILITY PLAN
%.Alf '? /16" = I'
-
;,-
'S-
"' !I,!
w
(fl
'-" z
>-
(fl
X
w
v' r

TO MAIN
7 \
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
CONNECT SEWER LAfrRfXISTING
(cleanout) L
-
- ---
_.,,,.,,,,..

EXISTING PARCEL ADJECENT
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
)
w--

UTILITY PLAN
0 u
N
0 L
0 L
(I)
Q)
>0
<(~
~m
w -
> ci u
C
3::
0 -........._
-+--' >- _J C WW
0 _J <( U _J LL
·- <( <(
o_ I > a::: o_ I ~z
<( I l""l <C ~Cf)
A-9
Outlook
Re: 131 Valley View reasonable accomodation appeal
From Josh Sullivan
Date Wed 1/22/2025 8:12 AM
To Margaret Kavanaugh-Lynch <[email protected]>; Renee Nickenig <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>
Cc Lisa Dal Gallo
•
On Tuesday, January 21, 2025 at 09:32:35 PM PST, Josh Sullivan wrote:

Introduction
The Planning Commission should grant this appeal of the October 17 approval of 131 Valley View Avenue’s owners’ reasonable accommodation request. 131 Valley View owners’ seek to set aside zoning laws so that they could add multiple improvements to the rear of their home, but they have not established a link between the presumed disability and their claimed need to disregard the City’s hillside development standards.

In addition, the Planning Department does not appear to have explored potentially alternative construction locations that do not violate the hillside development standards with 131 Valley View’s owners, and it appears to have ignored the wildfire-related threats to neighbors’ health, safety, and property threat that will be created by adding more than one thousand square feet of new construction in the backyard of a home on a non-conforming lot that is already perilously close to the neighboring homes.

Relevant Facts
131 Valley View Avenue is a nearly 1400 square foot, one level home that was built in 1958. 131 Valley View has 3 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms and is on a 6745 square foot, non-conforming lot in the Fairhills neighborhood, which is zoned R20 Hillside. The owners of 131 Valley View have resided in the home for approximately 4 years. During this period, appellants have observed both owners function independently without mobility aids. However, appellants do not dispute one occupant of 131 Valley View is disabled as defined under California and federal law based on the information they currently possess.
127 Valley View is also on a non-conforming lot because the original owners of 127 Valley View and 131 Valley View split a standard-sized Fairhills lot in half before the homes were built in the 1950s. Consequently, 127 Valley View’s property line is as close as 6 feet from 131 Valley View’s attached garage. 131 Valley View and the immediately neighboring homes at 127 Valley View and 135 Valley View back up to Marin Municipal Water District’s Los Ranchitos Water Tank, and all area homes are within the Wildlife Urban Interface, a transition zone between wildland and human development that is prone to wildfires.

To provide additional information and context to the photos and drawings that are part of the record, appellants submit and identify the following photos:

Appellants’ 1 – Photo of 127 Valley View with 135 Valley View in the background Appellants’ 2 – Photo depicting proximity of 131 Valley View’s garage to 127 Valley View’s structure Appellants’ 3 - Photo depicting 131 Valley View’s back yard with 135 Valley View in the background Appellants’ 4 – Another photo depicting proximity of 131 Valley View’s garage to 127 Valley View’s structure Appellants’ 5 – Close-up photo of 131 Valley View’s garage exterior wall relative to fence between lots Appellants’ 6 – Another close-up photo of 131 Valley View’s garage exterior wall relative to fence between lots The threats wildfires pose to the residents of Valley View Avenue and the immediately surrounding areas is clear and well documented. For example, a January 2023 Marin Independent Journal article highlights the release of a statewide interactive map that documents the ever-growing wildfire threat to Marin’s unincorporated areas like Los Ranchitos. (www.marinij.com/2023/01/02/marins-riskiest-fire-zones-expand-in-state-map/; marincounty.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=688f506cfb144067826bb35a062b0f0a) The article contains prescient quotes considering the recent devastating fires in Los Angeles County: “’What we’re seeing here is no surprise,’ Marin County fire Chief Jason Weber said. ‘Based on the fire seasons the last 10 years or so, we know fire is spreading more rapidly and with greater intensity. The proposed maps are a more accurate representation of what we’ve been experiencing.”
Adding more than 1000 square feet of construction to 131 Valley View’s back yard along two non-conforming lot lines will undeniably add density to an area with a documented fire risk, and relevant literature on the subject, including a study published in Fire Ecology that analyzes the Camp Fire and other recent wildfires in California, confirms increasing housing density next to wildlands is a recipe for disaster because density becomes a detriment once a wildfire starts and begins to spread. (See https://fireecology.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s42408-021-00117-0) If the Planning Commission affirms the request for reasonable accommodation, the planned construction at 131 Valley View will effectively create a single uninterrupted structure that will run from 127 Valley View to 135 Valley View. The Planning Commission can avoid creating a direct threat to the area’s residents and their property by performing a comprehensive analysis and denying the reasonable accommodation request to the extent it permits construction in the backyard of 131 Valley View in violation of the hillside development standards.

The Deficient Reasonable Accommodation Analysis:

Appellants object to the October 17 reasonable accommodation approval on three grounds. First, the owners of 131 Valley View have not established the required nexus between the reported disability and the claimed need to set aside zoning laws to perform proposed den and bedroom additions. Second, the approval dismisses alternative locations for the proposed backyard additions without providing any meaningful analysis. Finally, the approval appears to ignore California Code of Regulations Section 12179 and the patently obvious fire risk that poses a direct threat to the health and safety of the area’s residents.
1) There Is No Nexus
To prove a reasonable accommodation is necessary, proponents “must show that, but for the accommodation, they will likely be deprived of the opportunity to enjoy the housing of their choice." (United States v. California Mobile Home Park, 107 F.3d 1374, 1380-81 (9th Cir.1997).) This analysis is "highly fact-specific, requiring case-by-case determination." (United States v. California Mobile Home Park Mgmt. Co., 29 F.3d 1413, 1418 (9th Cir.1994).) There must be an identifiable relationship, or nexus between the requested accommodation and the individual’s disability. For example, in U.S. v. City of Chicago Heights, 161 F.Supp.2d 819 (N.D. Ill. 2001), the District Court describes the showing required to establish necessity as follows: "The concept of necessity requires at a minimum the showing that the desired accommodation will affirmatively enhance a disabled plaintiff’s quality of life by ameliorating the effects of the disability. Plaintiffs must show that but for the accommodation, they likely will be denied an equal opportunity to enjoy the housing of their choice." (Id. at 834 (internal quotes and citations omitted).) Howard v. HMK Holdings LLC, 98 F.3d 1185 (9th Cir. 2021) does not involve zoning laws but is instructive. In Howard, a landlord served a 60-day notice terminating tenancy after a disabled month-to-month tenant rejected its offer of a oneyear lease at a higher rent. Citing his disability, the tenant requested a reasonable accommodation of 6 months to move because he intended to move to Florida and did not want to move twice. The District Court held the landlord properly rejected the reasonable accommodation request, and the 9th Circuit affirmed and observed nothing about the disability prevented an earlier move-out and nothing about its denial prevented the tenant from enjoying the same right to housing as any other tenant who refused to sign a new lease.

Howard v. City of Beavercreek, 108 F.Supp.2d 866 (S.D.Ohio 2000) also illustrates why there has been no showing of necessity in this case. In Howard, a man who suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder requested a variance to erect a fence which exceeded the city’s height limit to block his neighbor’s view onto his property. The city denied the variance and the man sued claiming the city failed to reasonably accommodate his disability. The District Court held the height ------ -----
- -- ----------------------------
variance for the fence was not a necessary accommodation because the plaintiff had lived in his home for 15 years without the fence and only stated that he might be forced to move from his home if he could not build the fence.

The same is true here because the owners of 131 Valley View have not demonstrated how complying with San Rafael’s zoning laws denies them with the equal opportunity to enjoy the housing of their choice. They simply must reconfigure the construction to comply with applicable zoning law’s setback requirements. While appellants contend the proposed 300 square foot den expansion is unrelated to the claimed disability, if 131 Valley View’s owners move the proposed den to another location in the front or rear of their home, they can enjoy the same quality of life and the same additional square feet while complying with the City’s hillside development standards. 2) There Was No Exploration of Alternative Backyard Sites The Planning Department’s October17 reasonable accommodation approval summarily rejects potential alternative backyard sites that “may provide an equivalent level of benefit” (Page 2, Paragraph 3) without even identifying let alone analyzing the relative viability of those alternative locations. Instead, the Planning Department states the planned 300 square foot dining room/den expansion is superior to the alternatives it has not discussed because 131 Valley View’s owners will not have to regrade their backyard if the addition is built on an existing slab. Similarly, without providing any analysis or discussing potential alternatives, the Planning Department concludes the main bedroom expansion “will allow for safer mobility within the bedroom.” (Page 2, Paragraph 3.) Appellants acknowledge the Planning Department must respect the applicant’s privacy rights when it issues a public report that discusses a reasonable accommodation request. Because there is nothing private about evaluating potential alternative construction locations that do not involve the claimed disability or reasonable accommodation process, appellants can only conclude the Planning Department did not perform such evaluation work in this case.

The Planning Commission should grant this appeal because the Planning Department’s failure to require a more robust inquiry into alternative backyard construction sites and cursory rejection of unaddressed alternate sites confirms the Planning Department’s opinions lack factual foundation and are unsupported. 3) The Approval Ignores CCR 12179’s Public Safety Exception While San Rafael’s reasonable accommodation laws (SMRC 14.26.060 et seq.) are modeled on California Code of Regulations Section 12176 et seq., San Rafael Municipal Code lacks a complete analog for California Code of Regulations Section 12179 – Denial of Reasonable Accommodation or Reasonable Modification.

Section 12179 states a reasonable accommodation may be denied if it “constitute[s] a direct threat to the health or safety of others (i.e. a significant risk of bodily harm) or would cause substantial physical damage to the property of others, and such risks cannot be sufficiently mitigated or eliminated by another reasonable accommodation. . .” The Planning Department’s October 17 approval is silent with respect to the obvious fire hazards posed by adding more than 1000 square feet of construction along the 127 Valley View’s and 135 Valley View’s property lines. These risks could be potentially mitigated by moving the locations of the den and bedroom additions away from the property lines.

Because California and Federal reasonable accommodation and disability laws do not support their claim, the Planning Commission should direct the owners of 131 Valley View change their plans with respect to the scope and location of their planned backyard additions.

Just as the Planning Department’s failed to contemplate and discuss alternative construction locations, the Planning Department also failed to analyze and address the nature, duration, and severity of the potential wildfire risks, the likelihood that fire-related injury or property damage will occur; the likely cancellation of 127, 131, and 135 Valley View’s homeowners’ insurance, or the availability of alternatives that mitigate the danger associated with the proposed backyard construction at 131 Valley View.

By ignoring the wildfire threat posed by the planned construction in the backyard of 131 Valley View, the Planning Department ignores the City’s fundamental interest in wildfire mitigation. The City of San Rafael has a strong interest in enforcing its zoning laws in a manner that minimizes the danger to life and property posed by wildfire, especially when those zoning laws can be enforced in a non-discriminatory manner. Therefore, the Planning Commission should reject the Planning Department’s deficient reasonable accommodation approval, apply Section 12179 in its entirety, and grant this appeal.
4) Denial of Due Process
Appellants have objected in writing to the scheduled January 28 appeal hearing because the Planning Department has informed them it is issuing a supplemental report likely on January 24 that addresses the appeal and 131 Valley View’s “good faith” offer to lower an unidentified roof line.

Appellants reproduce email correspondence with the Planning Department below, believe a supplemental report is procedurally improper and unnecessary during the appeal process, and contend the Planning Department should have issued any supplemental long ago given the multiple continuances of this appeal at the owners of 131 Valley View’s request.
/ / /
Margaret Kavanaugh-Lynch
From:[email protected]
To:Josh Sullivan
Thu, Jan 16 at 6:05 PM
HelloI am on vacation from January 16th to January 27th. I will reply to your inquires when I return.

If your need is urgent, please contact Micah Hinkle, Community and Economic Development Director:
[email protected]
If you have questions about the Planning Commission packet, please contact the project planner for both development projects, Renee Nickenig, Associate Planner: [email protected] Thank you,
Margaret Kavanaugh-Lynch (she/her) | City of San Rafael Planning Manager, Community and Economic Development Department Renee Nickenig
From:[email protected]
To:Josh Sullivan
Thu, Jan 16 at 6:05 PM
Thank you for your message. I will be out of the office until Tuesday, January 21st, and will respond to your message as soon as possible after my return.

Renee Nickenig | City of San Rafael
Associate Planner, Community & Economic Development Department 1400 5th Avenue, 3rd floor
San Rafael, CA 94901
415-485-3397
/ / /
Josh Sullivan
From
To:Margaret Kavanaugh-Lynch
Cc:Renee Nickenig,Lisa Dal Gallo
Thu, Jan 16 at 6:05 PM
Ms. Kavanaugh-Lynch -
My wife Lisa Dal Gallo and I appreciate your involvement in our appeal and January 15 email citing Chapter 14.28 et seq. of the municipal code.

We too have read it and filed a timely appeal. We also note there is no language in Chapter 14.28 that contemplates let alone authorizes the submission of a supplemental report based on a modified reasonable accomodation request.

In fact. Section 14.28.050 states: "After the hearing, the appellate body shall affirm, modify or reverse the original decision. Written notice of the decision shall be mailed to the applicant and to the appellant.(emphases added)" The link in your email below leads to Section 14.28 et seq. - not your department's original report recommending 131 Valley View Ave.'s reasonable accomodation request. Please forward that report to us as you claim to have done on Tuesday.

Please also forward all communications between your department and our neighbors 131 Valley View Ave. and/or their design professionals, as well as all blue prints, plans, as builts etc. that reflect or referece the "good faith" roof modifications our neighbors have proposed since we appealed the original decision.

By reporting your intent to generate a new report based on new facts, you have improperly created a moving target that is patently contary to the San Rafael code section you cited.

Finally, as I stated on Tuesday, publishing your department's new report on the Friday before a Tuesday hearing - 3 days after the public written comment period has closed - sandbags and prejudices interested parties like us.

Because we are not confident you will promptly respond to our document request, we renew our request for a continuance of the hearing.

Josh Sullivan
On Tuesday, January 14, 2025 at 05:22:39 PM PST, Margaret Kavanaugh-Lynch <margaret.kavanaugh[email protected]> wrote:

Hello Mr. SullivanThe San Rafael Municipal Code outlines the steps that staff must take when a decision is appealed. Chapter

14.28 requires us to bring an appeal of the Director’s decision to the Planning Commission and set it for a public hearing. We are required to write a staff report that sets out the project, the decision of the Director, as well as the appeal received and present that to the Commission. Based on their independent judgement, they are free to either uphold the decision of the Director or overturn it, by making new findings relevant to the project. The findings for the Reasonable Accommodation permit are found here. They were the basis of the Director’s decision and they will be the basis of the Planning Commission’s decision as well.

At the hearing, you are welcome to speak as the appellant. It is customary to allow 10 minutes in the hearing for you to make a presentation. Beyond that time, you are also welcome to answer any questions asked by the Commissioners. The property owner will be offered 10 minutes to rebut the appeal as well. I understand that they have lowered the roof height of the project as a good faith effort and that will be included in the staff report. After that, any member of the community may also testify regarding this appeal. Then the Chair of the Planning Commission will close the public hearing and the Commission will deliberate on the project and finally they will call for a motion and take action. They have a list of options before them and those details are included in the staff report. Renee will send you the report when it is released to the public and the Planning Commissioners, typically the Friday before the hearing.

If you want to make a presentation at the hearing using PowerPoint, please send it to me by noon on January 27th so that I can ensure it is loaded and ready on Tuesday night.

Lastly, please know that any decision of the Planning Commission can be appealed to the City Council.

I hope this helps to explain the process of appeals and answers your questions. Please let me know if you have any other concerns.

Sincerely,
Margaret Kavanaugh-Lynch (she/her) | City of San Rafael Planning Manager, Community Development Department
1400 5th Avenue
San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 485-3095
/ / /
Josh Sullivan
From
To:Renee Nickenig
Cc:Lisa Dal Gallo
Tue, Jan 14 at 10:04 AM
Renee -
----
Thanks for confirming the appeal is scheduled to be heard on the 28th.

Why is a new staff report being issued?
A new report seems unnecessary in the context of an appeal and suggests our neighbors have modified the reasonable accommodation request one more time.

We are also concerned by the timing of the release of the new staff report because next Tuesday is the deadline to submit a written statement in support of our appeal.

The city had plenty of time to issue a timely new staff report because the appeal hearing has been continued twice at our neighbors’ request. The timing of the new report suggests the city is comfortable with denying us and potentially others due process while it facilitates our neighbors’ planned construction.

We request a continuance of the appeal hearing if the city issues the new report without giving us the opportunity to address it in writing.

Josh
On Jan 13, 2025, at 12:37 PM, Renee Nickenig <[email protected]> wrote:

Hello Josh,
Yes - the project is scheduled for the 28th. Noticing will be posted and go out in the mail today.

The staff report will be published next week, but please let me know if you have any questions in the meantime.

Thank you,
Renee
Renee Nickenig | City of San Rafael
Associate Planner, Community & Economic Development Department 1400 5th Avenue, 3rdfloor
San Rafael, CA 94901
415-485-3397
<Outlook-ekz31opu.png>
From: Josh Sullivan
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2025 7:45 AM
To: Renee Nickenig <[email protected]> Cc: Lisa Dal Gallo
Subject: 131 Valley View Ave.

Renee -
Please confirm the planning commission will hear the appeal on 131 Valley View’s reasonable accommodation request on the 28th.

Josh
Conclusion
There is no clear connection between the owners of 131 Valley View’s request for a reasonable accommodation and the claimed disability. The City of San Rafael does not have to set aside its zoning laws so that 131 Valley View’s owners can expand their home where they chose to, regardless of the risks they create. Because the proposed backyard construction projects are contrary to reasonable accommodation law, the Planning Commission should grant this appeal.

Outlook
RE: 131 Valley View Ave - Appeal
From Margaret Kavanaugh-Lynch <[email protected]> Date Tue 2/4/2025 8:51 AM
To Scott Mccrea
Cc Renee Nickenig <[email protected]>
Hello ScottWe will include this email and photo in the Correspondence section of the staff report.

Sincerely,
Margaret Kavanaugh-Lynch (she/her) | City of San Rafael Planning Manager, Community Development Department
1400 5th Avenue
San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 485-3095
From: Scott Mccrea
Sent: Monday, February 3, 2025 11:23 AM
To: Margaret Kavanaugh-Lynch <[email protected]> Cc: Renee Nickenig <[email protected]> Subject: 131 Valley View Ave - Appeal
Margaret: could we please also include this aerial screen shot from Google Maps in the meeting packet? It’s a good bird’s-eye view of our locations and provides a helpful perspective.

Scott

Outlook
RE: 131 Valley View Ave - Appeal
From Margaret Kavanaugh-Lynch <[email protected]> Date Wed 1/29/2025 2:37 PM
To Scott Mccrea
Cc Renee Nickenig <[email protected]>
Hello ScottYes, we received both emails and they will be included in the PC packet in which the appeal is included.

Sincerely,
Margaret Kavanaugh-Lynch (she/her) | City of San Rafael Planning Manager, Community Development Department
1400 5th Avenue
San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 485-3095
From: Scott Mccrea
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2025 2:27 PM
To: Margaret Kavanaugh-Lynch <[email protected]> Cc: Renee Nickenig <[email protected]> Subject: Fwd: 131 Valley View Ave - Appeal
Margaret: Thanks for your email yesterday regarding the new February date for the Commission meeting. I wanted to check if you also received my earlier email below and confirm it will also be included with my comments in the packet.

Begin forwarded message:

From: Scott Mccrea
Date: January 22, 2025 at 11:11:46 AM PST
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: 131 Valley View Ave - Appeal
My home at 135 is directly above the water tank. Subject project address 131 is to the immediate right of 135. 127 is to the right of 131 (Dal Gallo residence). Please add to my previous submission. This may help to visualize our WUI location. Thanks. •
~SAN
~
RAFAEL
lH~C.llYWIIHAMISSION
Scott McCrea
135 Valley View Ave
San Rafael, CA
Outlook
RE: 131 Valley View Ave - Appeal
From Planning Public Comment <[email protected]> Date Tue 1/28/2025 5:29 PM
To Scott Mccrea
Cc Renee Nickenig <[email protected]>
Hello Mr. MccreaThank you for your comment. This item as been postponed from tonight's Planning Commission meeting at the request of the appellant. The new tentative date is February 25th. We will send out new notices to inform the community and we will include your comments in the packet for that meeting.

Sincerely,
Margaret Kavanaugh-Lynch (she/her) | City of San Rafael Planning Manager, Community Development Department
1400 5th Avenue
San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 485-3095
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Mccrea
Sent: Monday, January 20, 2025 4:36 PM
To: Planning Public Comment <[email protected]> Cc: Margaret Kavanaugh-Lynch <[email protected]> Subject: 131 Valley View Ave - Appeal
We are adjacent neighbors of the subject address. I received the Appeal notice and am responding.

In an earlier correspondence to Renee I relayed my concern about the continued availability of fire insurance were the project installed. We lost our fire insurance as well as did other neighbors over the past few years due to the increased incidence of wild fires in California prompting carriers to exit the state. We were finally able to find another carrier after great effort and increased expense. We’re in the WUI and are nestled in a large and dense forest of trees. These woods contain sizable open space of dozens of acres, most being inaccessible due to their sharp slope. I relayed my insurance concern before the LA disaster.

Do the recent SoCal events affect the City’s underwriting standards for WUI new construction? The 131 project appears to increase the current property’s living space size by two-thirds according to the plans I’ve received. The scale of additions show encroachments into required setbacks for both my home and that of our neighbor on the other side of 131. That is a lot of new density of flammable material to fuel a fire. In the thirty years we’ve resided here, we’ve had some experience observing this: some twenty years •
ago firefighting aircraft flew repeated sorties over the eucalyptus grove at the end of Ridgewood Drive, barely a quarter of a mile from our home. Again, just last year we watched the same aerial attack on a wildfire above Lucas Valley Road a little more than a mile from here. Finally, plans also show no provision for additional cars of new tenants. This aggravates an already dangerous situation for all our local community since we are located on a narrow and very steep cul-de-sac.

My sensitivity on this is triggered by our efforts to harden our property against wildfires. I’ve been working with CalFire for some time in meeting their fire mitigation requirements. We’ve cleared massive juniper bushes and their roots, removed trees of all kinds and replaced windows upstairs and down with fire resistant, tempered multi-pane glass. We’re not done yet. Our efforts and associated expenses of many thousands of dollars are on file with CalFire. New construction here doesn’t seem compatible with all our mitigation efforts.

Scott McCrea
135 Valley View Ave
San Rafael, CA 94901
Outlook
Re: Continuing Hearing for 131 Valley View Appeal
From Carol Underwood
Date Mon 2/17/2025 7:50 PM
To Renee Nickenig <[email protected]>
Cc Hastaie
3 attachments (1 MB)
Response to appeal.Reasonable Accommodation Application 131 Valley View Ave.February.17.2025.docx; Figure 1. Proposed floorplan.jpg; Figure 2. Distance btw 127 & 131 & 135 Valley View.details copy.jpg; Dear Renee,
Thank you for the opportunity to provide a formal response to the appeal. Please find our response attached together with figures 1 & 2, which are mentioned in our response.

Please let me know if you need any additional information.

Best regards,
Carol
®
•
Reasonable Accommodation Application 131 Valley View Ave, San Rafael, CA 94901 This application is for reasonable accommodation (see Figure 1). The total proposed additions to the back of the house total less than 350 sq ft beyond the current roofline. The total additional square footage proposed in this application, including the two enclosed porches and extended front window area, is approximately 500 sq ft. The appellants’ claim or implication that this application proposes to add an additional 1,000 sq ft is false and misleading.

Non-conforming lot
“Non-conforming lot” refers to the fact that the original lot was divided, so the lots for 127 and 131 Valley View are about half the size of other lots in this area and are non-conforming with respect to the zoning regulations for this specific section of San Rafael.

Objections to proposed additions to northwest/back side of residence

1. Dining room addition (18 ft deep by 14.5 ft wide=261 sq ft). • With the proposed addition, the distance between 131 and 135 Valley View will be about 20 ft as the crow flies (see Figure 2), so does not create a “density issue” with respect to space.

2. Primary bedroom/bath extension (4ft x 21 ft = 84 sq ft). • This very modest proposed extension of a mere 4 feet beyond the existing back wall is reasonable and clearly necessary to make it feasible for Habib to move safely in the bedroom and bathroom given his mobility disability.
• The back, northwest edge of 131 is currently 20 ft from 127 Valley View as the crow flies. With the 4-foot extension, the residence edge of 131 will be 21 ft from the residence at 127 Valley View (due to the angle of the building at 127 Valley View), as shown in Figure 2. In short, the two structures will not be brought closer together by adding this modest extension.

Clearly, the claims regarding any additional fire hazard are not applicable and were already taken into consideration by the Planning Department.

Since there were no objections to enclosing the two porch areas, this response does not address those matters.

Hillside restrictions
Another issue that the appeal raises is the question of whether the addition can be seen from public streets. As documented, the additions to back of the house will not be visible from public streets or thoroughfares.

Another aim is that construction “minimizes the impact of hillside development and grading,” which the proposed project clearly does as the addition on the northeast side will be built where there is a 10”-12” deep slab in place so will not require additional grading. Moreover, the slab is flat, and the proposed structure will not be built on the slope of the hill.

Establishment of ADA-recognized disability
Habib Hastaie contracted polio as an infant, which caused atrophy and nerve damage to his left leg. Several decades ago, Habib was diagnosed with post-polio syndrome, an ADA-recognized disability that is permanent and leads to new and worsening symptoms over time. These symptoms include, but are not limited to, muscle and joint weakness, susceptibility to falls, fatigue, and pain.

As described in the original reasonable accommodation application, the additional space is necessary for him to maneuver safely with mobility aids (custom-made leg brace, cane, walker, etc.), which are required to prevent falls and loss of balance. This has been documented in multiple medical reports that we have discussed with the Planning Department in the past and will make available upon request.

Minor point
The assertion regarding “the multiple continuances of this appeal at the owners of 131 Valley View’s request,” is inaccurate. The only hearing we were unable to attend was scheduled for December 10, 2024, when one of us was on a work-related international trip.

Thank you for your consideration.

I 15'- 5"
flt
0 DINING ..
<g)(N)
~ 0 14'- 5" 7'- 1"
0 (N) ~•) <9 - <g) (N)
- -
V ~· ..... (N) '8 ..... ·r:v:7 ······ .. •
<!> •· .....
~ ,__ ~ 0 @j) @j) I 3 - '1 1
11111
1 11111
1 11111
L_ D r ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, BATH ➔ . 1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1, .,, ' ,, , a ..., (E) BATH 1
1 1
1 1
1isr,~t 1
1 1
1 I
(E) PRIMARY BEDROOM l~ ~ ' p •~II
: 111 111
1 I ~7 11 111 1
,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1
.... -- (E) KITCHEN ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, I - ,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,: -~ f@l D 11
1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1 11 ::e: • ~
11 11
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
: 1:,:,:,:,:• o~ •:
~ =tb
I 11111 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,, - 1 I I I I I I I I I t·
11 F ',','li'M' l~ l ~I 1,1, (E) LINEN - I 111111 I I E, 1111 A
(E) CL {E) HALL
~ l '
8'-8" l <
1---
- I
~ ~ (E) CL (E) HALL ----
CL
~ I 1111
@I (E) LIVING
~
T (E) BEDROOM = (E) BEDROOM I
9'
~ PROVISICJlS FC t
lEVATal
(N) CL (@ CL (N) FOYERr: <!>
13' @ - (N) \-'::) ~ ~
12·- 10- 11'- 1''

T (N) PORCH
J "' (Nt
- r , ___ I 2'- 7' 12·- 11· 2'- 7'
9'- 4" 18'- 1"

PROPOSED MAIN HOUSE FLOOR PLAN
sc;PLE 1/ 4" .. r

CAL FIRE Hazard Map for 131 Valley View Avenue as of February 14, 2025 ••
Fairfax
Margarira
Valley
Te ra da H19
C n
R a
Red --11 I
R d H \ Av
San Anselmo
Ross
.:,-qRaf el
,"Hi/I
Sun Valley
,an R.lfa
M racleM
c m r 1
Moo H,11
San Rafael
no ,
Back
Cany
I
■ Es.ri, NASA, NGA. USGS, FEMA I County of Mann, California State Park5, Esri, Tom Tom, Ga'rm1n, Safe.. Powered by Esri About this Map
This map displays adopted Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ) in the State Responsibility Area (SRA), effective April 1st 2024. tt al displays recommended FHSZ in the local Responsibility Area (LRA)ITom 2007-2011.

Due to regulatory processes, there are lands that a.re no longer classified as SRA and have bGCOme dassified as LRA yet had a FHSZ designation from the 2007 SRA FHSZ map adoption. The areas are shown on the map with hatched symbology.

To verify your Fire Hazard Severity Zone in LRA, please contact your local agency.

Use the link below to access the combined FHSZ data:

Legend Map Layers
Fire Hazard Severity Zones
FHSZ in SRA- Effective April 1, 2024
lllilllllii Very High
a.i High
lillllllii Moderate
FHSZ in LRA - Reclassified from SRA
~ VeryHigh
~/, High
~ Moderate
FHSZ in LRA- Recommended 2007-2011
Very High
ADDITION & NEW ATTACHED ADU PROJECT SITE DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 01.13.25
Δ
Δ EXISTING BUILDING ADDITION NEW ATTACHED ADU PORCH CONVERSION DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 01.13.25

DEMO WALL
1 ABAB
2 3
1 2
3 EXISTING WALL EXISTING UPPER FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/4" = 1' DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 01.13.25 EXISTING LOWER FLOOR PLAN (GARAGE) SCALE: 1/4" = 1'

EXISTING WALL
$GFCI NEW WALL REF. NEW ATTACHED ADU (A= 702 SQ.FT.)
1 AB
2 3 PROPOSED ATTACHED ADU FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/4" = 1' SEE SHEET A-6 FOR PLAN NOTES DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 01.13.25
(STORAGE /LAUNDRY) EXISTING WALL 1 AB $GFCI NEW WALL PORCH CONVERSION = 63 SQ.FT. A ADDITION = 407 SQ.FT. SEE SHEET A-8 FOR PLAN NOTES DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 01.13.25 PROPOSED MAIN HOUSE FLOOR PLAN EXISTING FRONT ELEVATION (SOUTH) DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 01.13.25 EXISTING REAR ELEVATION (NORTH) EXISTING RIGHT ELEVATION (EAST) EXISTING LEFT ELEVATION (WEST) NEW DECK DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 01.13.25 PROPOSED FRONT ELEVATION (SOUTH) PROPOSED REAR ELEVATION (NORTH) DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 01.13.25 PROPOSED RIGHT ELEVATION (EAST) PROPOSED LEFT ELEVATION (WEST) EXTERIOR WALL GAPS: annular spaces around pipes, electric cables, conduits or openinings in sole/bottom plates at exterior walls shall be closed with cement mortar, concrete masonry or a similar method acceptable to the enforcing agency to prevent passage of rodents. LAUNDRY: a. conductor wires with an installed neutral and a four-prong outlet are required for dryers and cooking units. b. provide one minimum seperate 20 amp circuit to laundry appliances. c. vent dryer w/smooth metal duct to ext. w/backdraft damper. duct to be 4" min. dia.; 14' max length w/2 elbows provide one minimum seperate 20 amp circuit to laundry appliances. d. termination of all environmental air ducts shall be a minimum of 3 feet from property lines or openings into the building (i.e. dryers, bath and utility fans etc. must be 3 feet away from doors, windows, opening skylights or attic vents) e. laundry room lighting: all lights shall be fluorescent or controlled by an occupant sensor. f. installation instuctions for all listed equipment shall be provided to the field inspector at time of inspection. g. provide a 220 volt gfi electrical receptacle h. where a closet is designed for the installation of clothes dryer, an opening of not less than 100 square inches for makeup air shall be provided in the door. SMOKE DETECTORS: new 110v smoke detectors (with battery backup) which are audible in all sleeping areas & at the following locations: 1. hallways leading to bedrooms; 2. above tops of stairs; 3. at least one every level and any area where ceiling height is more than 24" above hallway ceiling leading to sleeping room. all smoke detectors are to be interconnected per 2022 CRC R-314.4 (activation of one alarm will activate all of the alarms in the individual unit & alarm will be clearly audible in all bedrooms over background noise levels with all intervening doors closed) GUARD RAILS: guardrail req'd at walking surface 30" or more above grade. guardrail height shall be min. 42" high with intermediate rails such that 4" sphere shall not pass through. guardrail & connection shall be capable of resisting 20 plf horiz. load perpendicular to top rail and intermediate rails, panel filters and their connections shall be capable of withstanding a load of at least 25 pounds per square foot applied horizontally at right angles ofver the entire tributary area, including openings and spaces between rails. ATTIC ACCESS PANEL: R807.1: 22"x30" min. panel (size larger to accomodate fau as req'd) located in hallway or other readily accessible location. if FAU in attic, provide 30" min deep platform in front of firebox & lighting outlet switched at access door near furnace. PRESSURE TREATED WOOD: to be used for wood in contact w/earth or embedded in concrete or masonry. 6" min. clear from grade to framing LANDINGS: Provide 36" deep landing outside all exterior doors (not more than 7-3/4" lower than threshold for in-swinging doors and not more than 1/2" lower than threshold for outswinging doors; min. 1/4" slope for weather exposed landings; balconies and roof decks sealed underneath DOOR TO GARAGE: door between garage & house to be self-closing; tight-fitting solid wood door 1-3/8" thick or approved 20 min. fire-rated door 1-HR WALL BETWEEN GARAGE & LIVING SPACE: 5/8" type x gyp. bd garage side; 2x6 wd studs @ 16" o.c. w/R-19 batt insul; 1/2" gyp bd @ house side. 1-hr clg btween garage & house: 2 layers 5 8" type X gyp. bd. garage side (fasten per CBC Table 7-C item 21-1.1) Fire separation shall extend through ceiling to the underside of roof sheathing. HOSE BIBS: provide a non-removable backflow prevention device on all new exterior hose bibs, and lawn sprinkler/irrigation systems. All hose bibs must have approved anti-siphon device SLOPE OF GRADE: The grade shall fall a minimum of 6 inches within the first 10 feet (5%).where lot lines prohibit 6" of fall within 10', drains or swales shall be constructed to ensure drainage away from the structure. WATERPROOF/GFCI PROTECTED OUTLETS: at exterior at front and rear of dwelling having access to grade and at all balconies; decks; and porches greater than 20 SFWATER HEATER: a. seismic anchorage of water heater include 3 anchors or straps at points within the to upper and lower one-third of its vertical dimension-the lower anchor/strap located to maintain a minimum distance of 4 inches above the controls b. pressure relief valve with drain a minimum distance of 4 inches above the controls c provide 24 inch minimum wide door to water heater compartment; min 30" x 30" workspace by firebox d. dwh location prohibited in bdrm; bathrm; clothes clst; or area open to same except direct vent appliance e. if located over framing; requires watertight pan w/1" drain f. externally wrapped with min. R-12 insulation ATTIC VENTILATION: vent 1 s.f./150 s.f. of attic area or 1 s.f./300 s.f. if >50% of venting is located above mid-point of attic per 2022 CRC. CRAWLSPACE VENTILATION: vent 1 s.f./150 s.f. of underfloor area: U.O.N., provide painted 6"x16" G.S.M. vents as close to corners as possible and allowing cross-ventilation. Vents shall be covered with 1 4" wire mesh UNDER-FLOOR CLEARANCE: provide min. 18" clear to exposed ground in crawlspaces from joists or structural wood floors or 12" to wood girders. Otherwise, such wood framing shall be pressure-treated or have natural resistance to decay. CRAWLSPACE ACCESS: Provide min. 18"x24" crawlspace access panel. Ventilation 1 s.f./150 s.f. of crawl space area. ADDRESS NUMBERS: Show location of address numbers on building elevations clearly visible from adjacent access street or road. numbers to be min. 4" high with min. stroke with of 1/2" and shall contrast with the background ARC-FAULT CIRCUIT INTERRUPTER: at all branch circuits that supply 120 volt, single-phase, 15 and 20 ampere receptacle outlets installed in all dwelling unit rooms and kitchens, except bathrooms and garages. CEC 210.12 TOILET: max.1.28 gal. per flush; min. 30" width clearance; min 24" front clearance; fixture centered min 15" from side; caulk & seal fixture where it meets floor. STAIRS: conform to a. 1 1 4"-2" diameter handrail mounted 34 to 38in. above the tread nosing. required at all stairs with 4 or more risers)-return at ends b. handrails shall be mounted so that the completed rail and supporting structure are capable of withstanding a load of at least 200 pounds applied in any direction at any point on the rail. cbc-table 16-b, foot note 9. c. headroom min. 6'8" abv stair treads d. handrail projection max. 3.5" into req'd stair width. stringers and other projections are limited to 1-1/2" projection each side. e. rise & run of stairs (max. rise 7-3/4"; min. run 10") f. handrail required at stairs with two or more risers; handrail both sides required at ext stairs; handrail at one side allowed at int. stairs g. at ext. stairs; handrails to extend 12" horiz at top and extend one tread length at bottom of run & return to adj. wall or post EGRESS WINDOW: 5.7 sq. ft. min. (5 sq. ft. min. allowable at ground level); 20" wide by 24" high; max. 44" to finished sill' opens directly to public way; yard or court that opens to a public way SAFETY (TEMPERED) GLAZING: at: (1) hazardous locations-windows adjacent to: tubs, showers, and tub/showers (2) adjacent to and within 24 inches of either edge of doors (3) glazing less than 60" above walking surface at stairways or landings (4) windows within 5' horiz. from tub/shower unless btm of glazing >60" abv. standing surface of tub/shower. CARBON MONOXIDE ALARMS: (Sec:R315) new 110v carbon monoxide alarm (with battery backup) installed in each bedroom, and outside each area adjacent to a sleeping area; each story of the building; and in any basement SHOWER/TUB: • showerhead 1.8 gal. per min. max. a. shower stalls shall be a minimum finished interior of 1,024 square inches, be capable of encompassing a 30" diameter circle, and any doors shall swing out of the enclosure have a clear opening of 22" minimum. (cpc 411.6 and 411.7) b. glazing in any portion of the shower, bathtub, or hydro-massage tub enclosure shall be safety glazing (i.e. tempered glass) when the bottom edge of the glazing is less than 50" above the standing surface of the unit. (cbc 2406.3 and crc r308.4) c. shower stalls and bathtubs with shower heads installed, shall have walls finished with a non-absorbent surface for a minimum of 6' above the floor. d. any new or replaced mixing valve in a shower (including over a tub) shall be pressure balancing set at a maximum 120° f. any new or replaced water-filler valve in bathtubs/whirlpools shall have a temperature limiting device set at a maximum of 120° e. the water heater thermostat cannot be used to meet the these provisions. (cpc 414.0 and 418.0) f. hydro-massage tubs (i.e. jacuzzi tubs) shall have motor access, a gfci protected dedicated circuit, and be ul listed. all metal cables, fittings, piping, or other metal surfaces, within 5' of the inside wall of the hyrdo-massage tub shall be properly bonded. hydro-massage tubs shall be bonded g.materials used as backers for wall tile in tub and shower areas and wall panels inshower areas shall be glass mat gypsum panel, fiber-reinforced gypsum panels,non-asbestos fiber-cement backer board, or non-asbestos fiber-cement reinforced cementitious backer units installed in accordance with manufacturers' recommendations. [r702.4.2] h.water-resistant gypsum board shall not be installed over a class i or ii vaporretarder in a shower or tub compartment. [r702.3.7] water resistant gypsumbacking board shall not be used where there will be direct exposure to water, or inareas subject to continuous high humidity. [r702.3.7.1] BATHROOM: a. all receptacles shall be gfci protected & tamper resistant. new/additional outlets shall have a dedicated 20-amp circuit. (cec 406.11, 210.8, 210.11) b. provide energy star compliant mechanical ventilation system capable of providing 5 air changes/hr-mechanical , 50 cfm minimum; exhaust fans are required in all bathrooms, even if an operable window is installed. exhaust fans and lighting shall have separate control switches (even if a combination unit is installed). the exhaust fan may need to be supplied by a gfi protected circuit based on the manufacturer's requirements, and shall be control with an accesible humidistat ( CGBSC Section 4.506.1) c. termination of all environmental air ducts shall be a minimum of 3 feet from property lines or openings into the building (i.e. dryers, bath and utility fans etc. must be 3 feet away from doors, windows, opening skylights or attic vents) with dampers. d. lighting fixtures located within 3' horizontally and 8' vertically of the bathtub rim or shower stall threshold shall be listed for a damp location, or listed for wet locations where subject to shower spray. (cec 410.10) e. Lighting shall be high efficiency fixtures (e.g. fluorescent, led). At least one luminaire shall be controlled with an occupant sensor with controls that do not allow the fixtures to be automatically turned on or allow the fixture to be always on f. maximum flow for bathroom faucet to be 1.20 gallon/minute g.materials used as backers for wall tile in tub and shower areas and wall panels inshower areas shall be glass mat gypsum panel, fiber-reinforced gypsum panels,non-asbestos fiber-cement backer board, or non-asbestos fiber-cement reinforced cementitious backer units installed in accordance with manufacturers' recommendations. [r702.4.2] h.water-resistant gypsum board shall not be installed over a class i or ii vaporretarder in a shower or tub compartment. [r702.3.7] water resistant gypsumbacking board shall not be used where there will be direct exposure to water, or inareas subject to continuous high humidity. [r702.3.7.1] KITCHEN: a. conductor wires with an installed neutral and a four-prong outlet are required for dryers and cooking units. b. provide two separate 20amp circuits for kitchen small appliances, with no other outlets on the circuits. c. termination of all environmental air ducts shall be a minimum of 3 feet from property lines or openings into the building (i.e. dryers, bath and utility fans etc. must be 3 feet away from doors, windows, opening skylights or attic vents) d. kitchen lighting: all permanently installed lighting shall be high efficacy. e. installation instuctions for all listed equipment shall be provided to the field inspector at time of inspection. f. gfci protection at all receptacles serving kitchen counter tops; receptacles within 6 feet of a wet bar sink; at each kitchen and dining area counter space wider than 12 inches. locate so that no point along the counter wall is over 24" from a receptacle. all receptacles to be tamper resistant g. maximum flow for kitchen faucet to be 1.8 gallon/minute h. all under cabinet lighting must be switched separately from other lighting in the home. i.electric range in a dwelling under 750 square feet, the hood capacity must be 160 cfm, or a 65 % capture efficiency. the gas-powered range hood in a dwelling under 750 square feet, the hood capacity must be 280 cfm, or an 85 % capture efficiency (ce). [cenc table150.0-g, cenc 150.0(o)g.1] CLOSETS: Lighting in clothes closet shall be fully glass enclosed or flourescent fixture. HOT WATER PIPING: Minimum 1" thick pipe insulation shall be installed on all accesible hot water piping. OUTDOOR LIGHTING: Outdoor lighting permanently mounted to a dwelling or other buildings on the same parcel shall be high efficacy and be controlled by onf of the following combinations: a. photocell and motion sensor b. photocell and time switch c. astronomical time clock d. EMCS with features of astronomical time clock, does not allow the luminarie to be ON during the day, and may be programmed to automatically turn lighting off at night. MEMBRANE PENETRATIONS: Membrane penetrations of fire-resistance assemblies shall comply with 2022 CBC section 714.3.2 Membrane penetrations of fire resistance rated assemblies shall be protected by and approved penetration firestop system. Exceptions. A. Membrane penetration of fire resistance rated walls by steel electrical boxes that do not exceed 16 square inches in area provided that the aggregate area of the openings through the membrane does not exceed 100 square inches in any 100 square feet of wall area. such boxes on opposite sides of the wall shall be separated by on of the following: -By a horizontal distance of not less than 24" where the wall is constructed with individual non communicating stud cavities. -By solid fireblocking -By protecting both boxes with approved listed putty pads. B. Membrane penetrations of fire resistance rated walls by listed electrical boxes provided that the boxes have been tested for use in fire resistance rated assemblies and are installed in accordance with the instruction included in the listing. Such boxes on opposite sides of the wall shall be separated by on of the following: -By the horizontal distance specified in the listing of the electrical boxes. -By solid fireblocking. -By protecting both boxes with listed putty pads. INDOOR LIGHTING: Indoor lighting for new homes and remodels must be high efficacy. The definition of "high efficacy luminaires" includes all light sources identified as "efficient" under the 2016 Standards. This includes linear flourescent; pin based compact flourescent, GU-24 base CFL, HID, and induction. High efficacy products include any luminaire that contains a JA8-compliant lamp or other light source. In other words, any luminaire can qualigy as high efficacy as long as it meets with the requirements of Section 150.0(k) and Joint Appendix JA8. WATER EFFICIENT PLUMBING FIXTURES FIRE STOPPING VENT TO BE PROVIDED, TYP. BRAND : brandguard or approved equal per r337.6 (see note #6 in fire high severity zone requirements section on sheet a5.1 STORAGE UNDER STAIRS: Provide 5 8" type x gyp bd under stairs at storage area, typ. MOISTURE BARRIER: Vapor retarder shall be a 6-mil polyethylene or approved vapor retarder with joints lapped not less than 6 inches shall be placed between the concrete floor slab and prepared 4 inch thick subgrade consisting of gravel, crushed stone or crushed concrete (crc r506.2.3). exception: subgrade is not required when the soil condition is of silty sand, sand-silt mixture (crc table r405.1). approvable methods: 1.icc esr#1413 – redgard waterproofing and crack prevention membrane, ccure pro-red waterproofing membrane 963, cbp 232 waterproofing and antifracture membrane, and jambo waterproofing membrane 2.icc esr #2417 – laticrete hydro ban 3.icc esr #2785 – polycoat-aquatight and flexideck 4. icc esr#3474 – mapelastic aquadefense waterproofing membrane HVAC CONDENSER: a.where equipment or appliances that require service are located on a roof with a 4:12or steeper slope, a level platform not less than 30"x30" must be provided at theservice side. [cmc 304.2] b.if in the attic, please note that a permanent 120-volt receptacle outlet and a lightingfixture shall be installed near the appliance. [cmc 304.4] c.if in the garage, please provide protection for the appliance or elevate the unit so it isout of the normal path of vehicles. [cmc 305.1.1] d.if outdoors, a compressor or portion of acondensing unit supported from the ground shall rest of a concrete or other approvedbase extending not less than 3 inches above the adjoining ground level. [cmc1105.2] e.outdoor condensing units shall have a clearance of at least 5 feet from the outlet of any dryer vent. [cenc 150.0(h)3a] WINDOWS REQUIREMENTS ALL HOUSE VENTILATION: M.E.P. GENERAL NOTES The exhaust fan in the house are required to remain on all times the building is occupied but can have an overirde control like a typical manual wall switch to turn fan off when necessary with the following: a. Whole house fans shall have a maximum of 1.0 sone sound rating, with a minum 100 cfm. HVAC contractor to provide and calculate system requirements. b. On the wall above switch, a label is required that states someting like "ventilation control" or "Operate Exhaust Fan when home is occupied" c. Whole house fans shall have insulated louvers or covers which close when the fan is off. Covers or louvers shall have a minimum insulation value of R4.2. d. Identify the exhaust or supply fans that are part of the mechanical ventilation system provides the appropriate ventilation rate. e. fan switch shall have a label reading the following: "this switch controls the indoor air quality ventilation for the home. leave it on unless the outdoor air quality is very poor." GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT AT BATHROOMS: At least one bathroom shall be provided with grab bar reinforcement for thewater closet, bathtub, and shower. Reinforcement shall be 2x8 nominal lumber. Reinforcement shall be locatedbetween 32" and 39-1/4" above the finished floor. Water closet reinforcement shall be installed on both side wallsof the fixture, or one side wall and the back wall. Where the water closet is not placed adjacent to a side wall capable of accommodating a grab bar, the bathroom shall have provisions for installation of floor-mounted,foldaway or similar alternate grab bar reinforcements. Shower reinforcement shall be continuous where wall framing is provided. Bathtub and combination bathtub/shower reinforcement shall be continuous on each end of the bathtub and the back wall. Additionally, back wall reinforcement for a lower grab bar shall be provided with the bottom edge located no more than 6" above the bathtub rim. (crcr327.1.1) DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 01.13.25
PROPOSED ROOF PLAN DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 01.13.25
WATER LEGEND EXISTING SEWER NEW SEWER VALLEY VIEW Ave. DRAWING FILE # OF SHEETS SHEETSCALE DATE CHECKED BY DRAWN BY DESIGN BY HORIZ: VERT:

DATE MARK DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN AS SHOWN

ADDITION AND ATTACHED ADU
131 Valley View Ave.

SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 01.13.25

Mayor Colin and the Members of the San Rafael City Council April 16, 2025