Date: February 12, 2010 11:35:37 AM PST
To: NOsborne@co.marin.ca.us
Cc: skinsey@co.marin.ca.us, BCrawford@co.marin.ca.us, fmansourian@co.marin.ca.us, bbeaumont@co.marin.ca.us, BDavidson@co.marin.ca.us, mmoheb@co.marin.ca.us, sperl@co.marin.ca.us
Subject: Re: Tsutsui Design Review (DR 10-29)
Hi Neal,
Please advise the writer ( Mitra Moheb?)of DPW's merit comments that
Mr. Tsutui owns in fee to the center line of N.Ferndale (see Assessor's
Parcel Map 48-2, Record of Survey Book 2007of Maps page 4, and
conveyance note on Map of Madron Book 4 page 8. And as a property owner
does not have to apply fo5 an encroachment permit to acces his own
property. DPW's quit claim deed is replete with erroneous claims to
roads that were drafted by DPW which are not described in Tamalpais
Water and Land to HLVT or supported by recorded titles
A 20 feet lomg driveway is not required. See Development code 22.20.090
E.2.
It is outrages that the writer of DPW's merit comments on Mr. Tsutsui's
projet require him to comply with 24.04.335 General conditions.
(a) All parking and loading spaces shall be provided on the same site as the use to which they relate.
MITRA MOHEB DID NOT REQUIRE MARIN HORIZON SCHOOL TO COMPLY WITH 23.04.335(a)IN HER MERIT COMMENTS.
And 24.04.335 (a) was not even cited in Marin Horizon Schools E.I.S.
Seems all Marinites are equal but some (Marin Haliburton School) are more equal than others.
Best regards,
Charles
-----Original Message-----
From: Osborne, Neal
To: charlessands@aol.com
Sent: Fri, Feb 12, 2010 10:45 am
Subject: RE: Tsustsui Design Review (DR 10-29)
Hello Charles,
You should have received it by now, it was mailed out on Tuesday. I
will insert
the comments below.
Prior to issuance of a building permit:
1. Per MCC §24.04.335(a) & §24.04.340(a), for single family dwellings,
2
on-site independently accessible parking spaces are required. If
on-street
parking is restricted or nonexistent then 2 additional on-site parking
spaces
are required for guests.
2. Per MCC §24.04.250, a minimum driveway length of 20 feet should be
provided
from the front of the garage or parking structure to the edge of
pavement. A
lesser length may be approved for constrained sites (refer to MCC
§24.15 for
more information).
3. The proposed slope for the temporary access way off of North
Ferndale Avenue
is 49%!! The provided Construction Management Plan shall identify what
equipments can and will be able to use this temporary access way.
4. The proposed temporary retaining wall will require a building
permit. A registered civil engineer or a structural engineer shall design the
site retaining walls. Provide calculations for the retaining walls.
5. In the traffic management plan, note that the traffic on North
Ferndale Avenue can not be delayed more than 3 minutes.
6. The drainage pattern along North Ferndale Avenue on the frontage of
the subject property and at the entrance to the temporary access way shall
not be changed and/or altered in any way.
7. It is generally not good practice to have the drainage under the
house. DPW recommends revising the drainage plan to show the proposed drainage
pipe outside
of the proposed building foot print.
8. The plans shall be reviewed and approved by Registered Civil
Engineer with soils engineering expertise or a Registered Geotechnical Engineer.
Certification shall be either by the engineer's stamp and signature on
the plans, or by stamp and signed letter.
9. Provide a detailed drainage plan for the project.
10. Applicant shall pay Public Transportation Facilities fees in
accordance with Marin County Code Chapter 15.07.
11. An encroachment permit shall be required for work within the county
road right-of-way.
12. A recorded encroachment permit is required for the stairs proposed
within North Ferndale Avenue road right of way. Stairs shall begin at least 4
feet back from edge of pavement and outside of the flow line of the existing
drainage along the street.
13. Submit Erosion and Siltation Control plans, per MCC §24.04.625.
Sincerely,
Neal Osborne
-----Original Message-----
From: charlessands@aol.com [mailto:charlessands@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, February 12, 2010 10:13 AM
To: Osborne, Neal
Subject: Re: Tsustsui Design Review (DR 10-29)
Hi Neal,
Haven't received DPW's merit comemts/meo by snail mail yet ????
Thanks,
Charles
-----Original Message-----
From: Osborne, Neal
To: charlessands@aol.com; Davidson, Berenice
Sent: Mon, Feb 8, 2010 4:25 pm
Subject: RE: Tsustsui Design Review (DR 10-29)
Hello Charles,
I will mail you a copy of the DPW memorandum. The story poles are a
fairly
standard requirement for new construction on a vacant lot. It was a
staff decision to have poles constructed for neighbors to see the location
and heightof the proposed structures. Staff did not receive a request for
story poles from any of the neighbors.
Sincerely,
Neal Osborne
------------------------------------------------------------
From: charlessands@aol.com [mailto:charlessands@aol.com]
Sent: Monday, February 08, 2010 4:02 PM
To: Osborne, Neal; Davidson, Berenice
Subject: Tsustsui Design Review (DR 10-29)
Hi Neal,
Received the Notice of Project Status. The DPW memorandum referred to
was not attached. Please email or snail mail it.
FYI
DPW has a bogus "Quit Claim" deed from the Homestead Land Trust that is
worthless per my Attorney.
Tamalpais Water and Land Company sold tract # 25 to Ralston White.
Tract #25's eastern boundary was the center line of N. Ferndale. Our
title chain
goes back to Ralston White. Ralston White conveyed ownership in fee to
the
center line of MPC.
Our title recorded in 1984 and Assessor's Parcel Map 48-02 clearly
shows that AP
048-023-26 and 27 own to the center-line of N. Ferndale Ave.
If DPW persists in their wrong headed notion that N. Ferndale Ave. is
County
owned we will require that DPW provide title research documents going
back to
1911.
Don't know why Koji is required to erect storey boards ? His project is
not visble from the streets, The TDRB did not require it. If they are being
solely erected for Barbara Affonso #4 MPC or David Green its an outrage.
Neither haveattended a single neighborhood review of Koji's project. And neither
had anything to say at the TDRB review the day it was approved. What
ever...everyone on MPC loves the design. :-)))
Best regards,
Charles
No comments:
Post a Comment