martin full set 07-16

Drawing File

Scale

Drawn By

Job

Sheet

Issued Description

krb/mh

1/4"=1'-0"

A0.1

martin and costin

Sheet Title

Project Name

Martin and Costin Residence 29066 Cliffside Drive Malibu, California 90265

title page

Lot 05 1024 harding ave. no. 202

venice, california 90291

310.663.6692

10.20.09 permit set submittal

STATE OF CALIFORN

IA

LICE

NSED ARCHITECTKIRK!

BLASCHKE

C-30765REN. 04.30.13

06.21.10 plan check corrections

06.28.11 progress set

Cliffside Residence

29066 Cliffside Drive Malibu, CA 90265

Drawing File

Scale

Drawn By

Job

Sheet

Issued Description

krb/mh

1/4"=1'-0"

A0.2

martin and costin

Sheet Title

Project Name


project information



310.663.6692

PROJECT DIRECTORY

SITE ADDRESS: OWNER MAILING ADDRESS: ARCHITECT: LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: STRUCTURAL ENGINEER: SEPTIC SYSTEM DESIGN: TITLE 24 CONSULTANT: LAND SURVEYOR: CIVIL ENGINEER: SOILS & GEOLOGIC ENGINEERS

29066 CLIFFSIDE DRIVE MALIBU, CA 90265 BRUCE MARTIN AND CAROLYN COSTIN 29066 CLIFFSIDE DRIVE MALIBU, CA 90265 KIRK BLASCHKE LOT 05 1024 HARDING AVENUE NO. 202 VENICE, CA 90291 T. 310.663.6692 MARNY RANDALL 909 EUCLID, SUITE 6 SANTA MONICA, CA 90403 T. 310.395.2615 F. 310.395.2368 SCOTT CHRISTIANSEN 710 WHILSHIRE BLVD. SUITE 230 SANTA MONICA, CA 90401 T. 310.395.7641 RICHARD SHERMAN TOPANGA UNDERGROUND 21300 DEERING COURT CANOGA PARK, CA 91304 T. 310.455.2189 F. 818.888.0114 TITLE 24-DATA CORP. 633 MONTEREY TRAIL FRAZIER PARK, CA 93225 T. 800.237.8824 F. 661.245.6374 LARRY PAERSON, LAND SURVEYOR 4229 KINGFISHER ROAD CALABASAS, CA 91302 T. 818.591.8709 STEPHEN R. SMITH P.C.C.E. INC. 2801 CALABASAS ROAD, SUITE 1020 CALABASAS, CA 91302 T. 818.568.5251 DONALD B. KOWALEWSKY ENVIRONMENTAL & ENGINEERING GEOLOGY 27101 OLD CHIMNEY ROAD MALIBU, CA 90265 T. 310.457.2456 F. 310.457.4721

SHEET LISTABBREVIATIONS

AT ANCHOR BOLT AREA DRAIN ADJUSTABLE ALUMINUM APPROXIMATELY ARCHITECT ASPHALT BOARD BITUMIN BUILDING BLOCKING BEAM BOTTOM BETWEEN CABINET CATCH BASIN CEMENT CERAMIC CEILING JOIST CENTERLINE CAULKING CLEAR CEILING COLUMN CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION CONTINUOUS DEMOLITION DOUGLAS FIR DOWNSPOUT DOUBLE DIAMETER DIMENSION DOWN DOOR DETAIL DRAWING DISHWASHER DRAWER EAST EXPANSION JOINT EACH ELECTRICAL ELEVATION EMERGENCY EQUAL EXISTING EQUIPMENT EXTERIOR FIRE ALARM FLOOR DRAIN FINISH FACE OR FACE OF FINISH FIBERGLASS FINISH FLASHING FINISH FLOOR FLOOR FLUORESCENT FACE OF STUD FIREPLACE FIREPROOF FRAMING FOOT FOOTING FREEZER GENERAL CONTRACTOR GAUGE GALVANIZED GLASS GROUND GYPSUM HOSE BIB HEADER HARDWARE HORIZONTAL HANDICAP HEIGHT HEATER HOUR HEIGHT INCHES INSULATION INTERIOR

JOINT JOIST KITCHEN LAMINATED LAVATORY POUND LINEN LINEAR LIGHT MANUFACTURER MATERIAL MAXIMUM MEDICINE CABINET MINIMUM MIRROR MISCELLANEOUS MECHANICAL METAL NEW NORTH NOT IN CONTRACT NOT TO SCALE NOMINAL OVER ON CENTER OPPOSITE OUNCES PLASTER PROPERTY LINE PLATE PAINTED PRESSURE TREATED POINT PLYWOOD RISER ROOF DRAIN ROOF RAFTER RADIUS REFERENCE REFRIGERATOR

@ A.B. A.D. ADJ. AL. APPROX. ARCH. ASPH. BD. BITUM. BLDG. BLK. BM. BOTT. BTWN. CAB. C.B. CEM. CER. C.J. C.L. CLKG. CLR. CLG. COL. CONC. CONSTR. CONT. DEMO. D.F. D.S. DBL. DIA. DIM. DN. DR. DTL. DWG. D.W. DRW. E. E.J. EA. ELEC. ELEV. EMER. EQ. EXIST./(E) EQUIP. EXT.

F.A. F.D. F.F./F.O.F. F.G. FDN. FIN. FL. F.F. FLR. FLUOR. F.O.S. F.P. FRPR. FRM FT FTG. FZR. G.C. GA. GALV. GL. GND. GYP. H.B. HDR. HDW. HORIZ. HNDCP. HT. HTR. HR. HT.

IN. INSUL. INT.

JNT. JST. KIT.

LAM. LAV. LB. LIN. LN. LT.

MFR. MAT. MAX. MED. CAB. MIN. MIR. MISC. MECH. MTL. (N) N. N.I.C. N.T.S. NOM. O/ O.C. OPP. OZ. PLAS. P. L. PL. PTD. P. T. PT. P.W. R. R.D. R.R. RAD. REF. REFR.

REINFORCEMENT REQUIRED RESILIENT REVISION RECOMMENDATION REGISTER REDWOOD ROOM SOUTH SALVAGED SCHEDULE SECTION SIMILAR SHELF SHEET SHEATHING SHOWER SPECIFICATIONS STAINLESS STEEL STEEL STAINED STRUCTURAL SQUARE TREAD TOP OF CURB TOP OF TELEVISION TOP OF WALL TELEPHONE TONGUE & GROOVE THICK TYPICAL UNDERGROUND UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE UNFINISHED VERTICAL VERIFY W.ARCH/OWNER VERTICAL GRAIN WITH WITH OUT WATER CLOSET WROUGHT IRON WATER PROOF WOOD WATER HEATER WASHER /DRYER WEIGHT

REINF. REQD. RESIL. REV. REC. RGTR. RWD. RM. S. SALV. SCHED. SEC. SIM. SHLF. SHT. SHTG. SHWR. SPECS. S.S. ST. STD. STRUCT. SQ. T. T.C. T.O. TV. T.W. TEL. T&G TH. TYP.

U.G. U.N.O. UNF. VERT. VER. V.G. W. W/O W.C. W.I. W.P. WD. WH. W/D WT.

SYMBOLS

detail drawing number

sheet number

section drawing number

sheet number

elevation drawing number

sheet number

door number

window number

smoke dectector

elevation per benchmark noted on surveyT.W.459.5

BA5.3

001

001

SD

2A10.10

A9.12

earthwork

concrete

masonry

steel

gypsum board

ceramic tile

finish wood

plywood

thermal insulation

exhaust fan

stucco

revision number#

VICINTY MAP

IMPERMEABLE SF COVERAGE ALLOWABLE = 11,996 SF HOUSE

BASEMENT BEYOND HOUSE

DRIVEWAY/PARKING AREA &

SIDEYARD DRIVE

PATIOS & WALKWAYS

PATH TO BEACH

STUDIO

BEACH STORAGE

TOTAL IMPERMEABLE SF

CALCULATIONS OF ALLOWABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF 6,366 SF

PROPOSED REMODEL:

50% BASEMENT IN EXCESS OF 1000 SF

NEW FIRST FLOOR FOOTPRINT

NEW SECOND FLOOR

EXISTING STUDIO

EXISTING BEACH STORAGE

TOTAL PROPOSED SQUARE FOOTAGE

TOTAL DISTURBED AREA TOTAL DISTURBED AREA

EXISTING SQUARE FOOTAGE

MAIN HOUSE

GARAGE

GUEST QTR

BREEZEWAY

PORCH

EXISTING STUDIO

EXISTING BEACH STORAGE

TOTAL EXISTING

PROJECT AREA INFORMATION

PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT DATA

SITE AREA:

EXCLUDED AREA [SLOPE 1:1 OR STEEPER]:

PROPOSED 2 STORY STRUCTURE

FIRST FLOOR =

SECOND FLOOR =

RATIO OF FIRST FLOOR TO SECOND

FLOOR - 499/5367 = .09

EXISTING AND PROPOSED SET BACKS

FRONT YARD - FROM 30' ROAD EASEMENT=

BACK YARD =

EAST YARD =

WEST YARD =

SIDE YARD SET BACKS = MIN. OF 26% OF FRONTAGE

PROPOSED TOTAL BUILDING AREA:

PROPOSED BUILDING HEIGHT:

85% OF ROOF ! 18'-0"

43,978 SF

7,082 SF

5,367 SF

499 SF

36'-10"

266'

10.5'

16.5'

6366 SF

MAXIMUM @ 22'-9 1/2"

2,774 SF

440 SF

501 SF

210 SF

88 SF

287 SF

177 SF

4,477 SF

36 SF

5,367 SF

499 SF

287 SF

177 SF

6,366 SF

EXISTING

4013

0

5025

3724

1055

287

177

14,281

PROPOSED

5,367

251

972

2,084

1,055

287

177

10,193

16,500 SF

29066 CLIFFSIDE DRIVE MALIBU, CA 90265 4468-001-009 SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING TYPE: FIVE NON RATED R-3 / U-1 VERY HIGH FIRE HAZARD SEVERITY ZONE SFD: TWO STORY W/ATTACHED 2 CAR BASEMENT GARAGE 22'-9 1/2" ABOVE FINISHED GRADE 43,978 SQUARE FEET, 1.01 ACRES 2 COVERED SPACES 2 UNCOVERED SPACES 30'-0" LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE TITLE 26, BUILDING CODE, INCORPORATING THE 2007 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE AND CITY OF MALIBU ADMENDMENTS LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE TITLE 27, ELECTRICAL CODE, INCORPORATING THE 2007 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE AND CITY OF MALIBU ADMENDMENTS LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE TITLE 28, PLUMBING CODE, INCORPORATING THE 2007 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE AND CITY OF MALIBU ADMENDMENTS LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE TITLE 29, MECHANICAL CODE, INCORPORATING THE 2007 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE AND CITY OF MALIBU ADMENDMENTS LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE TITLE 32, FIRE CODE, INCORPORATING THE 2007 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE AND CITY OF MALIBU ADMENDMENTS

LEGAL DESCRIPTION: RECORD OF SURVEY AS PER BK 57PG 47 - 50 OF R S EX OF ST LOT 9.CITY OF MALIBU, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES,STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SITE ADDRESS:

CURRENT USE:

PROPOSED USE:

CONSTRUCTION TYPE:

OCCUPANCY GROUP:

NUMBER OF STORIES:

HEIGHT OF HOUSE:

LOT AREA:

PARKING REQUIREMENTS:

ACCESSOR'S PARCEL #:

WIDTH OF STREET SERVING PROPERTY:

SPRINKLERS: YES

APPLICABLE BUILDING CODES:

PROJECT DATA

FIRE ZONE

CUT

FILL

TOTAL

IMPORT

EXPORT

R&R

0

EXEMPT

GRADING:

422.6

1.9

424.5

0

420.7

SAFETYNON-

EXEMPT

136.4

1.6

138

0

134.8

REMEDIAL TOTAL

559

3.5

562.5

0

555.5

GRADING CONFORMANCE

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

NOTE: ALL QUANTIES ARE IN CUBIC YARDS UNLESS OTHRWISE INDICATED. R&R = REMOVAL AND RECOMPACTION. EXEMPT GRADINGS INCLUDES ALL R&R, UNDERSTURCTURE, AND SAFETY GRADING.



COVER PROJECT INFORMATION TITLE XXIV COASTAL COMMISSION PERMIT COASTAL COMMISSION PERMIT COASTAL COMMISSION PERMIT GENERAL NOTES SURVEY OF HOUSE EXISTING HOUSE AS BUILTS NEW FOOT PRINT WITH RETAINED PERIMETER WALLS SITE PLAN FIRE DEPARTMENT PLAN/NOTES BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN RETAINING WALL PLAN MAIN FLOOR PLAN SECOND FLOOR PLAN FRONT DRIVEWAY ROOF PLAN BASEMENT REFLECTED CEILING PLAN GROUND FLOOR REFLECTED CEILING PLAN SECOND FLOOR REFLECTED CEILING PLAN SECTIONS SECTIONS SECTIONS SECTIONS SECTIONS EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS WINDOW SCHEDULE WINDOW DETAILS WINDOW DETAILS WATERPROOFING DETAILS DOOR SCHEDULE DOOR DETAILS FIXTURE SCHEDULE EXTERIOR DETAILS EXTERIOR DETAILS EXTERIOR DETAILS EXTERIOR DETAILS EXTERIOR DETAILS EXTERIOR DETAILS INTERIOR ELEVATIONS INTERIOR ELEVATIONS INTERIOR ELEVATIONS INTERIOR DETAILS SITE PLAN ELECTRICAL BASEMENT ELECTRICAL MAIN FLOOR ELECTRICAL SECOND FLOOR ELECTRICAL MECHANICAL BASEMENT PLAN MECHANICAL GROUND FLOOR PLAN MECHANICAL SECOND FLOOR PLAN STRUCTURAL NOTES, ABBREVIATIONS AND OBSERVATION SCHEDULE GROUND FLOOR AND GARAGE FOUNDATION FRAMING PLAN SITE RETAINING WALL AND DRIVEWAY GROUND FLOOR AND SECOND FLOOR FRAMING PLAN GARAGE FRAMING AND SITE RETAINING WALL FOUNDATION PLAN FOUNDATION DETAILS FRAMING DETAILS FRAMING DETAILS RETAINING WALL DETAILS RETINING WALL DETAILS AND ROOF DETAILS ROOF FRAMING DETAILS ROOF FRAMING DETAILS FRAMING DETAILS HARDY FRAMES- TYPICAL FOUNDATION DETAILS HARDY FRAMES- TYPICAL FRAMING DETAILS HARDY FRAMES- TYPICAL FLOOR SYSTEM DETAILS

A0.1 A0.2 A0.3 A0.4 A0.5 A0.6 A0.7 A1.1 A1.2 A1.3 A1.4 A1.5 A2.0 A2.1 A2.2 A2.3 A2.3B A2.4 A3.1 A3.2 A3.3 A4.1 A4.2 A4.3 A4.4 A4.5 A5.1 A5.2 A5.3 A6.1 A6.2 A6.3 A6.4 A7.1 A7.2 A8.1 A9.1 a9.2 A9.3 A9.4 A9.5 A9.6 A10.1 A10.2 A10.3 A11.1 E1 E2 E3 E4 M1 M2 M3 S1.0 S2.0 S3.0 S4.0 S4.1 S5.0 S5.1 S5.2 S5.3 S5.4 S6.0 S6.1 S6.2 HFX1 HFX2 HFX3


STATE OF CALIFORN

IA

LICE

NSED ARCHITECTKIRK!

BLASCHKE

C-30765REN. 04.30.13

north

PACIFIC OCEAN

Pacif

ic Co

ast H

ighwa

y

CLI

FFS

IDE

DR

POINT DUME COUNTY BEACH

BIR

DVIEW

AV

GR

AS

SW

OO

D A

V

DU

ME

DR

1

1

N9

KA

NA

N D

UM

E

HE

ATH

ER

CLI

FF

RD

POINT DUME PLAZA

PO

RT

SH

EA

D R

D

1

FE

RN

HIL

L D

R

WESTW

ARD

BEAC

H R

D

MALIBUPOINT DUME

POINT DUME

DUME COVE

BU

SC

H D

R

project site

Drawing File

Scale

Drawn By

Job

Sheet

Issued Description

krb

n/a

A0.3

loubek

Sheet Title

Project Name


title 24 energy calculations



310.663.6692




STATE OF CALIFORN

IA

LICE

NSED ARCHITECTKIRK!

BLASCHKE

C-30765REN. 04.30.13

TITLE XXIV

PERFORMANCE CERTIFICATE: Residential (Part 1 of 5) CF-1R Project Name Building Type ! Single Family ! Addition Alone Date

! Multi Family ! Existing+ Addition/Alteration

Project Address California Energy Climate Zone Total Cond. Floor Area Addition # of Stories

FIELD INSPECTION ENERGY CHECKLIST ! Yes ! No HERS Measures -- If Yes, A CF-4R must be provided per Part 2 of 5 of this form. ! Yes ! No Special Features -- If Yes, see Part 2 of 5 of this form for details. INSULATION Area Special Construction Type Cavity (ft2) Features (see Part 2 of 5) Status

FENESTRATION U- Exterior Orientation Area(ft2) Factor SHGC Overhang Sidefins Shades Status

HVAC SYSTEMS Qty. Heating Min. Eff Cooling Min. Eff Thermostat Status

HVAC DISTRIBUTION Duct Location Heating Cooling Duct Location R-Value Status

WATER HEATING Qty. Type Gallons Min. Eff Distribution Status

Central Furnace

119.2

0.96

Ducted

none

13.0 SEER

none

0.360

Large Gas

0.360

6.0

New

R-25

96% AFUE

0.360

Front (N)

New

New

Rear (S)

Ducted

none

Roof

5.0

!

New

1

Skylight

none

!

Setback

ZONE 3 HVAC

0.28

New

4,146

0.28

813

Bug Screen

Split Air Conditioner

150.0

Attic, Ceiling Ins, vented

Wood Framed

Bug Screen

418.5

Wood Framed w/o Crawl Space

New

Bug Screen

5.0

Central Furnace

Ducted

none

Perim = 462'

13.0 SEER

none

0.360

6.0

New

0.360

New

None

96% AFUE

0.360

All Pipes Ins

Rear (S)

New

Ducted

none

Left (E)

none

Slab

New

1

Right (W)

119

Setback

none

ZONE 1 HVAC

0.28

!

0.28

New

CA Climate Zone 06

5,408

n/a 2

MARTIN RES.

29066 CLIFFSIDE DR. MALIBU

6/23/2011

1


0.28

5,921

351.9

Bug Screen

378.0

Attic, Ceiling Ins, unvented

Wood Framed Attic

User Number: 1348

Bug Screen

Central Furnace

20.3

New

1.0

ID: 122506

Ducted

EnergyPro 5.1 by EnergySoft

Floor

13.0 SEER

0.360

6.0

New

R-19

0.360

RunCode: 2011-06-23T12:06:24

New

R-19

96% AFUE

Rear (S)

New

Ducted

none

Wall

Right (W)

none

New

1

Setback

none

ZONE 2 HVAC

0.28

New

0.28

4,742

Bug Screen


0.28

New

156.0


Bug Screen

Page 3 of 27

387.5

Unheated Slab-on-Grade

New

None

none



Project Address California Energy Climate Zone Total Cond. Floor Area Addition # of Stories

FIELD INSPECTION ENERGY CHECKLIST ! Yes ! No HERS Measures -- If Yes, A CF-4R must be provided per Part 2 of 5 of this form. ! Yes ! No Special Features -- If Yes, see Part 2 of 5 of this form for details. INSULATION Area Special Construction Type Cavity (ft2) Features (see Part 2 of 5) Status

FENESTRATION U- Exterior Orientation Area(ft2) Factor SHGC Overhang Sidefins Shades Status

HVAC SYSTEMS Qty. Heating Min. Eff Cooling Min. Eff Thermostat Status

HVAC DISTRIBUTION Duct Location Heating Cooling Duct Location R-Value Status

WATER HEATING Qty. Type Gallons Min. Eff Distribution Status

Split Heat Pump

Ductless / with Fan

16.0 SEER8.00 HSPF

!

1

!

Newn/a

New

Ductless / with Fan

16.0 SEER

n/a

8.00 HSPF

Ductless

1

Setback

ZONE 4 HVAC

!

CA Climate Zone 06 n/a 2

MARTIN RES.

29066 CLIFFSIDE DR. MALIBU

6/23/2011

Split Heat Pump

5,921

User Number: 1348

Split Heat Pump

ID: 122506EnergyPro 5.1 by EnergySoft

n/a

RunCode: 2011-06-23T12:06:24

Ductless

Setback

ZONE 5 HVAC

New

Split Heat Pump

n/a

Page 4 of 27

New



SPECIAL FEATURES INSPECTION CHECKLIST The enforcement agency should pay special attention to the items specified in this checklist. These items require special written justification and documentation, and special verification to be used with the performance approach. The enforcement agency determines the adequacy of the justification, and may reject a building or design that otherwise complies based on the adequacy of the special justification and documentation submitted.

HERS REQUIRED VERIFICATION Items in this section require field testing and/or verification by a certified HERS Rater. The inspector must receive a completed CF-4R form for each of the measures listed below for final to be given.

RunCode: 2011-06-23T12:06:24 ID: 122506

The DHW System Heat Transfer Products PH199-119 is a non-NAECA large storage gas water heater. Verify DHW details.

!

User Number: 1348

MARTIN RES. 6/23/2011

EnergyPro 5.1 by EnergySoft Page 5 of 27

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE: Residential (Part 4 of 5) CF-1R Project Name Building Type ! Single Family ! Addition Alone Date


OPAQUE SURFACE DETAILS Surface U- Insulation Joint Appendix

Type Area Factor Cavity Exterior Frame Interior Frame Azm Tilt Status 4 Location/Comments

FENESTRATION SURFACE DETAILS ID Type Area U-Factor1 SHGC2 Azm Status Glazing Type Location/Comments

(1) U-Factor Type: 116-A = Default Table from Standards, NFRC = Labeled Value (2) SHGC Type: 116-B = Default Table from Standards, NFRC = Labeled Value

EXTERIOR SHADING DETAILS Window Overhang Left Fin Right Fin ID Exterior Shade Type SHGC Hgt Wd Len Hgt LExt RExt Dist Len Hgt Dist Len Hgt

0.76

NewSlab

90

NFRC

Window

R-19

NFRC

5.0

0

150.0

New

2 - First Floor

R-19

0.360

180

0.074

16

14

1.00

NFRC

6

0.76

4.4.7-A1

NFRC

0.360

Marvin Wood - LoE

NFRC

New

Wall

3 - First Floor

0

16.5

4.3.1-A5

New

Wall

2 - First Floor

Window

Marvin Wood - LoE

14

New

1 - First Floor

NFRC

50.8

0.048

4.3.1-A5

0

7

0.1

90

8

0.074

NFRC

1

None

NFRC

Marvin Wood - LoE

8.0

!

180

52.2

MARTIN RES.

0

6/23/2011

1 - First Floor

Marvin Wood - LoE

Bug Screen

NFRC

441

0.28

9

NFRC

New

Floor

90

Window

None

0.76

270

0

270

0.360

180

0.074

15

NFRC

New

Marvin Wood - LoE

0.76

3

0.76

4.4.2-A4

Marvin Wood - LoE

New

Wall

3 - First Floor

Window

676

49.0

Page 7 of 27

Marvin Wood - LoENew

Wall

180

180Window

4.3.1-A5

NFRC

22

New

R-19

1 - First Floor

NFRC

0.730

4.3.1-A5

6

0.1

418.5

4.3.1-A5

2 - First Floor

0.360

Bug Screen

NFRC

11

0.28

1 - First Floor

Marvin Wood - LoE

Bug Screen

New

14.3

R-19123

150.0

0

20.3

0.28

0.28

12

New

Roof

3 - First Floor

5.0

Window

NFRC

Marvin Wood - LoE

0

0.074

90

90

0.28

NFRC

New

13

0.76

4.2.1-A7

Bug Screen

NFRC

174

New

Wall

3 - First Floor

Skylight

0.28

0.360

New

Wall

1 - First Floor

Window

1 - First Floor

Bug Screen

None

180

180

0.038

9

50.28

85.0

0.360

90

NFRC

0.76

4.3.1-A5

1 - First Floor

1 - First Floor

127

0.28

0

1 - First Floor

NFRC

Bug Screen

New

0

133

0.28

156.0

Wall

R-19

Marvin Wood - LoE

5

1 - First Floor

New

3

180

Window 35.0

R-19

90

90

0.360

0.730

4.3.1-A5

13

Marvin Wood - LoE

New

1.0

NFRC

22

Bug Screen

NFRC

New

36.0

Floor

2 - First Floor

Window

665

18.8

102.6

0.28

1 - First Floor

New

Wall

90

Window

0.074

180

10

NFRC

0.360

0.074

4.4.2-A4

4

0.76

90

4.3.1-A5

1 - First Floor

NFRC

Bug Screen

New

2,929

0.28

2.0

1 - First Floor

Marvin Wood - LoE

Marvin Wood - LoE

8.0

0.28

2 - First Floor

0

Window

Bug Screen

R-19

NFRC

90

New

2

180

R-19

90

0.360

0

NFRC

0.360

2 - First Floor

180

Bug Screen

0.048

4.3.1-A5

12

Marvin Wood - LoE

New

3 - First Floor

Bug Screen

0


NFRC

150

New

9.6

New

Slab

90

Window

19.5

R-19

16

0.1

New

90

Window

0.074

0.360

R-25

NFRC

90

0.074

4.4.7-A1

0.360

5.0

0.76

R-19

1 - First Floor

NFRC

Bug Screen

New

96.0

5.0

1 - First Floor

0.28

0.28

Wall

Window

User Number: 1348

7

NFRC

0.76

New

1

2 - First Floor

NFRC

0.76

ID: 122506

0.360

R-25

180

0.038

4.3.1-A5

11

2 - First Floor

0.76

NFRC

New

5.0

NFRC

3 - First Floor

Bug Screen

8.0

Marvin Wood - LoE

11

0.280.28

0.360

New

Roof

90

90

Window

293

3 - First Floor

0.76

15

2.0

New

R-19

90

Wall

0.074

8

0.360

0

270

10

0.074

4.2.1-A7

2

Bug Screen

0.76

25

4

0.76

RunCode: 2011-06-23T12:06:24

1 - First Floor

Marvin Wood - LoE

Bug Screen

New

151

291

24.0

0.360

R-19

02,908

3 - First Floor

5.0



OPAQUE SURFACE DETAILS Surface U- Insulation Joint Appendix

Type Area Factor Cavity Exterior Frame Interior Frame Azm Tilt Status 4 Location/Comments

FENESTRATION SURFACE DETAILS ID Type Area U-Factor1 SHGC2 Azm Status Glazing Type Location/Comments

(1) U-Factor Type: 116-A = Default Table from Standards, NFRC = Labeled Value (2) SHGC Type: 116-B = Default Table from Standards, NFRC = Labeled Value

EXTERIOR SHADING DETAILS Window Overhang Left Fin Right Fin ID Exterior Shade Type SHGC Hgt Wd Len Hgt LExt RExt Dist Len Hgt Dist Len Hgt

0.76

NewWall

NFRC

Window

R-19

NFRC

0

51.3

New

5 - Second Floor

R-19

0

30

0.76

NFRC

22

0.76

4.3.1-A5

NFRC

0.360

Marvin Wood - LoE

NFRC

New

Floor

5 - Second Floor

270

19.5

4.3.1-A5

New

Wall

4 - First Floor

Window

Marvin Wood - LoE

30

New

3 - First Floor

96.0

0.074

4.4.2-A4

0

23

90

24

0.074

NFRC

17

Bug Screen

NFRC

Marvin Wood - LoE

!

806

84.0

MARTIN RES.

90

6/23/2011

4 - First Floor

Marvin Wood - LoE

Bug Screen

NFRC

996

0.28

25

NFRC

Wall

22

Window

R-19

0.76

270

90

0

0.360

0

0.038

NFRC

New

Marvin Wood - LoE

19

0.76

4.3.1-A5

Marvin Wood - LoE

New

Slab

5 - Second Floor

Window

201

21.0

Page 8 of 27

Marvin Wood - LoENew

Slab

90

180Window

4.2.1-A7

NFRC

90

New

R-19

3 - First Floor

0.074

4.4.7-A1

22

43.9

4.4.7-A1

5 - Second Floor

0.360

Bug Screen

NFRC

27

0.28

4 - First Floor

Marvin Wood - LoE

Bug Screen

New

R-25514

19.0

180

9.2

0.28

0.28

28

Wall

5 - Second Floor

Window

NFRC

Marvin Wood - LoE

270

0.074

90

0

0.28

NFRC

New

29

0.76

4.3.1-A5

NFRC

New

Roof

5 - Second Floor

Window

0.28

0.360

New

Roof

4 - First Floor

Window

3 - First Floor

Bug Screen

R-19

0

0.074

25

210.28

15.0

0.360

180

NFRC

4.2.1-A7

5 - Second Floor

4 - First Floor

334

0.28

0

4 - First Floor

NFRC

Bug Screen

New

180

454

0.28

56.0

R-19

Marvin Wood - LoE

21

4 - First Floor

New

19

90

Window 20.0

R-19

90

180

0.360

0.074

29

Marvin Wood - LoE

New

NFRC

90

NFRC

New

Wall

5 - Second Floor

Window

106

24.0

0.28

4 - First Floor

New

Wall

90

Window

0.048

90

26

NFRC

0.360

0.074

4.3.1-A5

20

0.76

4.3.1-A5

4 - First Floor

Bug Screen

209

0.28

4 - First Floor

Marvin Wood - LoE

0.28

4 - First Floor

90

Bug Screen

None

NFRC

90

New

18

90

None

180

0.360

270

NFRC

0.360

5 - Second Floor

270

Bug Screen

0.074

4.2.1-A7

28

Marvin Wood - LoE

New

Bug Screen

270


NFRC

228

New

New

Wall

180

Window

R-25

New

180

Window

0.730

0.360

R-19

NFRC

0.730

4.3.1-A5

0.360

0.76

R-19

4 - First Floor

Bug Screen

New

56.0

3 - First Floor

0.28

0.28

Wall

User Number: 1348

23

NFRC

0.76

New

17

5 - Second Floor

NFRC

0.76

ID: 122506

0.360

R-19

0

0.074

4.3.1-A5

27

5 - Second Floor

0.76

NFRC

New

NFRC

Bug Screen

Marvin Wood - LoE

212

0.360

New

Wall

22

0

Window

313

5 - Second Floor

0.76

New

22

Roof

0.038

24

0.360

90

0

26

0.038

4.3.1-A5

18

Bug Screen

0.76

21

20

0.76

RunCode: 2011-06-23T12:06:24

4 - First Floor

Bug Screen

New

249

996

15.0

R-25

180194



BUILDING ZONE INFORMATION Floor Area (ft2)

System Name Zone Name New Existing Altered Removed Volume Year Built

Totals

HVAC SYSTEMS System Name Qty. Heating Type Min. Eff. Cooling Type Min. Eff. Thermostat Type Status

HVAC DISTRIBUTION Duct Ducts

System Name Heating Cooling Duct Location R-Value Tested? Status

!

!

!

!

!

WATER HEATING SYSTEMS

System Name Qty. Type Distribution

Rated Input (Btuh)

Tank Cap. (gal)

Energy Factor or RE

Standby Loss or

Pilot

Ext. Tank

Insul. R-Value Status

MULTI-FAMILY WATER HEATING DETAILS HYDRONIC HEATING SYSTEM PIPING

Control

Eff.

Prem

ium

Hot Water Piping Length (ft)

Add

Insu

latio

n

System Name Pipe

Length Pipe

Diameter Insul. Thick. Qty. HP Plenum Outside Buried

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

Ducted

0

New

ZONE 4 HVAC Split Heat Pump

6.0

Central Furnace

!

n/a

Split Heat PumpNew

676

0.96

ZONE 5 HVAC

Ducted

ID: 122506

ZONE 1 HVAC

514

Ductless

13.0 SEER

ZONE 2 HVAC

ZONE 1 HVAC

ZONE 5 HVAC

ZONE 4 HVAC

96% AFUE

Large GasHeat Transfer Products PH199-119

5 - Second Floor

Setback

0.0

Attic, Ceiling Ins, unvented

1

1 - First Floor

Setback

Page 9 of 27

9,9614 - First Floor

New


1

Ducted

Ducted

New

Split Heat Pump

6.0

Central FurnaceNew

n/a

Split Heat PumpNew

996

119

Ducted

0

ZONE 2 HVAC13.0 SEER

Ductless

16.0 SEER

ZONE 3 HVAC

ZONE 2 HVAC

96% AFUE

16.0 SEER8.00 HSPF

ZONE 5 HVAC

8.00 HSPF

MARTIN RES. 6/23/2011


1

n/a

Setback

29,285

n/a

1

2 - First Floor

User Number: 1348

8,064

0.78 %

New

All Pipes Ins


Ductless / with Fan


6.0

Central FurnaceNew

2,929

New

Ductless / with Fan

New

806

Ducted

13.0 SEER

ZONE 1 HVAC

ZONE 4 HVAC

199,000

5,921

ZONE 3 HVAC

96% AFUE

RunCode: 2011-06-23T12:06:24

Setback


0

1

Setback

6,760

ZONE 3 HVAC

1

3 - First Floor

New


4,114

MANDATORY MEASURES SUMMARY: Residential (Page 1 of 3) MF-1R Project Name Date

NOTE: Low-rise residential buildings subject to the Standards must comply with all applicable mandatory measures listed, regardless of the compliance approach used. More stringent energy measures listed on the Certificate of Compliance (CF-1R, CF-1R-ADD, or CF-1R-ALT Form) shall supersede the items marked with an asterisk (*) below. This Mandatory Measures Summary shall be incorporated into the permit documents, and the applicable features shall be considered by all parties as minimum component performance specifications whether they are shown elsewhere in the documents or in this summary. Submit all applicable sections of the MF-1R Form with plans. Building Envelope Measures: 116(a)1: Doors and windows between conditioned and unconditioned spaces are manufactured to limit air leakage. 116(a)4: Fenestration products (except field-fabricated windows) have a label listing the certified U-Factor, certified Solar Heat Gain Coefficient (SHGC), and infiltration that meets the requirements of 10-111(a). 117: Exterior doors and windows are weather-stripped; all joints and penetrations are caulked and sealed. 118(a): Insulation specified or installed meets Standards for Insulating Material. Indicate type and include on CF-6R Form. 118(i): The thermal emittance and solar reflectance values of the cool roofing material meets the requirements of 118(i) when the installation of a Cool Roof is specified on the CF-1R Form. *150(a): Minimum R-19 insulation in wood-frame ceiling or equivalent U-factor. 150(b): Loose fill insulation shall conform with manufacturers installed design labeled R-Value. *150(c): Minimum R-13 insulation in wood-frame wall or equivalent U-factor. *150(d): Minimum R-13 insulation in raised wood-frame floor or equivalent U-factor. 150(f): Air retarding wrap is tested, labeled, and installed according to ASTM E1677-95(2000) when specified on the CF-1R Form. 150(g): Mandatory Vapor barrier installed in Climate Zones 14 or 16. 150(l): Water absorption rate for slab edge insulation material alone without facings is no greater than 0.3%; water vapor permeance rate is no greater than 2.0 perm/inch and shall be protected from physical damage and UV light deterioration. Fireplaces, Decorative Gas Appliances and Gas Log Measures: 150(e)1A: Masonry or factory-built fireplaces have a closable metal or glass door covering the entire opening of the firebox. 150(e)1B: Masonry or factory-built fireplaces have a combustion outside air intake, which is at least six square inches in area and is equipped with a with a readily accessible, operable, and tight-fitting damper and or a combustion-air control device. 150(e)2: Continuous burning pilot lights and the use of indoor air for cooling a firebox jacket, when that indoor air is vented to the outside of the building, are prohibited. Space Conditioning, Water Heating and Plumbing System Measures: 110-113: HVAC equipment, water heaters, showerheads, faucets and all other regulated appliances are certified by the Energy Commission. 113(c)5: Water heating recirculation loops serving multiple dwelling units and High-Rise residential occupancies meet the air release valve, backflow prevention, pump isolation valve, and recirculation loop connection requirements of 113(c)5. 115: Continuously burning pilot lights are prohibited for natural gas: fan-type central furnaces, household cooking appliances (appliances with an electrical supply voltage connection with pilot lights that consume less than 150 Btu/hr are exempt), and pool and spa heaters. 150(h): Heating and/or cooling loads are calculated in accordance with ASHRAE, SMACNA or ACCA. 150(i): Heating systems are equipped with thermostats that meet the setback requirements of Section 112(c). 150(j)1A: Storage gas water heaters rated with an Energy Factor no greater than the federal minimal standard are externally wrapped with insulation having an installed thermal resistance of R-12 or greater. 150(j)1B: Unfired storage tanks, such as storage tanks or backup tanks for solar water-heating system, or other indirect hot water tanks have R-12 external insulation or R-16 internal insulation where the internal insulation R-value is indicated on the exterior of the tank. 150(j)2: First 5 feet of hot and cold water pipes closest to water heater tank, non-recirculating systems, and entire length of recirculating sections of hot water pipes are insulated per Standards Table 150-B. 150(j)2: Cooling system piping (suction, chilled water, or brine lines),and piping insulated between heating source and indirect hot water tank shall be insulated to Table 150-B and Equation 150-A. 150(j)2: Pipe insulation for steam hydronic heating systems or hot water systems >15 psi, meets the requirements of Standards Table 123-A. 150(j)3A: Insulation is protected from damage, including that due to sunlight, moisture, equipment maintenance, and wind. 150(j)3A: Insulation for chilled water piping and refrigerant suction lines includes a vapor retardant or is enclosed entirely in conditioned space. 150(j)4: Solar water-heating systems and/or collectors are certified by the Solar Rating and Certification Corporation.

User Number: 1348 RunCode: 2011-06-23T12:06:24 ID: 122506

6/23/2011MARTIN RES.

Page 10 of 27EnergyPro 5.1 by EnergySoft


150(m)1: All air-distribution system ducts and plenums installed, are sealed and insulated to meet the requirements of CMC Sections 601, 602, 603, 604, 605 and Standard 6-5; supply-air and return-air ducts and plenums are insulated to a minimum installed level of R-4.2 or enclosed entirely in conditioned space. Openings shall be sealed with mastic, tape or other duct-closure system that meets the applicable requirements of UL 181, UL 181A, or UL 181B or aerosol sealant that meets the requirements of UL 723. If mastic or tape is used to seal openings greater than 1/4 inch, the combination of mastic and either mesh or tape shall be used 150(m)1: Building cavities, support platforms for air handlers, and plenums defined or constructed with materials other than sealed sheet metal, duct board or flexible duct shall not be used for conveying conditioned air. Building cavities and support platforms may contain ducts. Ducts installed in cavities and support platforms shall not be compressed to cause reductions in the cross-sectional area of the ducts. 150(m)2D: Joints and seams of duct systems and their components shall not be sealed with cloth back rubber adhesive duct tapes unless such tape is used in combination with mastic and draw bands. 150(m)7: Exhaust fan systems have back draft or automatic dampers. 150(m)8: Gravity ventilating systems serving conditioned space have either automatic or readily accessible, manually operated dampers. 150(m)9: Insulation shall be protected from damage, including that due to sunlight, moisture, equipment maintenance, and wind. Cellular foam insulation shall be protected as above or painted with a coating that is water retardant and provides shielding from solar radiation that can cause degradation of the material. 150(m)10: Flexible ducts cannot have porous inner cores. 150(o): All dwelling units shall meet the requirements of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 62.2-2007 Ventilation and Acceptable Indoor Air Quality in Low-Rise Residential Buildings. Window operation is not a permissible method of providing the Whole Building Ventilation required in Section 4 of that Standard. Pool and Spa Heating Systems and Equipment Measures: 114(a): Any pool or spa heating system shall be certified to have: a thermal efficiency that complies with the Appliance Efficiency Regulations; an on-off switch mounted outside of the heater; a permanent weatherproof plate or card with operating instructions; and shall not use electric resistance heating or a pilot light. 114(b)1: Any pool or spa heating equipment shall be installed with at least 36 of pipe between filter and heater, or dedicated suction and return lines, or built-up connections for future solar heating. 114(b)2: Outdoor pools or spas that have a heat pump or gas heater shall have a cover. 114(b)3: Pools shall have directional inlets that adequately mix the pool water, and a time switch that will allow all pumps to be set or programmed to run only during off-peak electric demand periods. 150(p): Residential pool systems or equipment meet the pump sizing, flow rate, piping, filters, and valve requirements of 150(p). Residential Lighting Measures: 150(k)1: High efficacy luminaires or LED Light Engine with Integral Heat Sink has an efficacy that is no lower than the efficacies contained in Table 150-C and is not a low efficacy luminaire as specified by 150(k)2. 150(k)3: The wattage of permanently installed luminaires shall be determined as specified by 130(d). 150(k)4: Ballasts for fluorescent lamps rated 13 Watts or greater shall be electronic and shall have an output frequency no less than 20 kHz. 150(k)5: Permanently installed night lights and night lights integral to a permanently installed luminaire or exhaust fan shall contain only high efficacy lamps meeting the minimum efficacies contained in Table 150-C and shall not contain a line-voltage socket or line-voltage lamp holder; OR shall be rated to consume no more than five watts of power as determined by 130(d), and shall not contain a medium screw-base socket. 150(k)6: Lighting integral to exhaust fans, in rooms other than kitchens, shall meet the applicable requirements of 150(k). 150(k)7: All switching devices and controls shall meet the requirements of 150(k)7. 150(k)8: A minimum of 50 percent of the total rated wattage of permanently installed lighting in kitchens shall be high efficacy. EXCEPTION: Up to 50 watts for dwelling units less than or equal to 2,500 ft2 or 100 watts for dwelling units larger than 2,500 ft2 may be exempt from the 50% high efficacy requirement when: all low efficacy luminaires in the kitchen are controlled by a manual on occupant sensor, dimmer, energy management system (EMCS), or a multi-scene programmable control system; and all permanently installed luminaries in garages, laundry rooms, closets greater than 70 square feet, and utility rooms are high efficacy and controlled by a manual-on occupant sensor. 150(k)9: Permanently installed lighting that is internal to cabinets shall use no more than 20 watts of power per linear foot of illuminated cabinet.

!User Number: 1348EnergyPro 5.1 by EnergySoft RunCode: 2011-06-23T12:06:24 ID: 122506

MARTIN RES.

Page 11 of 27

6/23/2011


150(k)10: Permanently installed luminaires in bathrooms, attached and detached garages, laundry rooms, closets and utility rooms shall be high efficacy. EXCEPTION 1: Permanently installed low efficacy luminaires shall be allowed provided that they are controlled by a manual-on occupant sensor certified to comply with the applicable requirements of 119. EXCEPTION 2: Permanently installed low efficacy luminaires in closets less than 70 square feet are not required to be controlled by a manual-on occupancy sensor. 150(k)11: Permanently installed luminaires located in rooms or areas other than in kitchens, bathrooms, garages, laundry rooms, closets, and utility rooms shall be high efficacy luimnaires. EXCEPTION 1: Permanently installed low efficacy luminaires shall be allowed provided they are controlled by either a dimmer switch that complies with the applicable requirements of 119, or by a manual-on occupant sensor that complies with the applicable requirements of 119. EXCEPTION 2: Lighting in detached storage building less than 1000 square feet located on a residential site is not required to comply with 150(k)11. 150(k)12: Luminaires recessed into insulated ceilings shall be listed for zero clearance insulation contact (IC) by Underwriters Laboratories or other nationally recognized testing/rating laboratory; and have a label that certifies the lumiunaire is airtight with air leakage less then 2.0 CFM at 75 Pascals when tested in accordance with ASTM E283; and be sealed with a gasket or caulk between the luminaire housing and ceiling. 150(k)13: Luminaires providing outdoor lighting, including lighting for private patios in low-rise residential buildings with four or more dwelling units, entrances, balconies, and porches, which are permanently mounted to a residential building or to other buildings on the same lot shall be high efficacy. EXCEPTION 1: Permanently installed outdoor low efficacy luminaires shall be allowed provided that they are controlled by a manual on/off switch, a motion sensor not having an override or bypass switch that disables the motion sensor, and one of the following controls: a photocontrol not having an override or bypass switch that disables the photocontrol; OR an astronomical time clock not having an override or bypass switch that disables the astronomical time clock; OR an energy management control system (EMCS) not having an override or bypass switch that allows the luminaire to be always on EXCEPTION 2: Outdoor luminaires used to comply with Exception1 to 150(k)13 may be controlled by a temporary override switch which bypasses the motion sensing function provided that the motion sensor is automatically reactivated within six hours. EXCEPTION 3: Permanently installed luminaires in or around swimming pool, water features, or other location subject to Article 680 of the California Electric Code need not be high efficacy luminaires. 150(k)14: Internally illuminated address signs shall comply with Section 148; OR not contain a screw-base socket, and consume no more than five watts of power as determined according to 130(d). 150(k)15: Lighting for parking lots and carports with a total of for 8 or more vehicles per site shall comply with the applicable requirements in Sections 130, 132, 134, and 147. Lighting for parking garages for 8 or more vehicles shall comply with the applicable requirements of Sections 130, 131, 134, and 146. 150(k)16: Permanently installed lighting in the enclosed, non-dwelling spaces of low-rise residential buildings with four or more dwelling units shall be high efficacy luminaires. EXCEPTION: Permanently installed low efficacy luminaires shall be allowed provided that they are controlled by an occupant sensor(s) certified to comply with the applicable requirements of 119.

User Number: 1348 RunCode: 2011-06-23T12:06:24 ID: 122506

6/23/2011MARTIN RES.

Page 12 of 27EnergyPro 5.1 by EnergySoft

&

Drawing File

Scale

Drawn By

Job

Sheet

Issued Description

krb

n/a

A0.4

martin and costin

Sheet Title

Project Name


coastal development permit



310.663.6692





STATE OF CALIFORN

IA

LICE

NSED ARCHITECTKIRK!

BLASCHKE

C-30765REN. 04.30.13

CITY OF MALIBU PLANNING COMMISSION

RESOLUTION NO. 07-

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OFMALIBU APPROVING COASTALDEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 05-060,SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 06-028, MINOR MODIFICATION NO. 07-022AND ADMINISTRATIVE PLAN REVIEW NO. 07-095 - AN APPLICATIONTO REMODEL AN EXISTING 4 013 SQUARE FOOT SINGLE-FAMILYRESIDENCE; CONSTRUCTION OF A 1 017 SQUARE FOOTBASEMENT/SUBTERREAN GARAGE, A 1 373 SQUAR FOOT FIRT-FLOOR ADDITION AND A 499 SQUARE FOOT SECOND-FLOORGUEST/SECOND RESIDENTIAL UNIT; AND INSTALLATION OF ANAL TERNATIVE ONSITE WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM IN ARURAL RESIDENTIAL 1 ZONING DISTRICT LOCATED AT 29066

, CLIFFSIDEDRIVE (MARTIN)

THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MALIBU DOES HEREBY FIN, ORDER

AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Recitals.

A. On May 17, 2005, an application was submitted to the Planning Division forAdministrative Plan Review (APR) No. 05-012, and Site Plan Review (SPR) No. 05-028 for a remodel of

the existing 4 013 square foot residence, a 1 904 square foot first-story addition, and a 605 square foot28- foot high second-story addition. It was determined on August 15 2005, that the project would require

processing as a coastal development permit.

B. On April 19 , 2006 , an application was submitted for Coastal Development Permit (CDP)No. 05-060 including SPR No. 06-028 and Minor Modification (MM) No. 07-022 to remodel the existing

013 square foot single- family residence, construct a 1 017 square foot basement/subterranean garage, a

373 square foot first-floor addition, a 499 square foot second-floor guest/second residential unit andinstall an alternative onsite wastewater treatment system (AOWTS). APR No. 07-095 was added later toaccount for the basement request in conjunction with a coastal development permit.

C. On October 8 - 2006, story poles were placed on the subject property to demonstrate theheight of the proposed project and to analyze visual impacts. Shortly thereafter, planning staff wascontacted by Sam and Peggy Hall Kaplan, upslope neighbors at 29061 Cliffside Drive, who requested that

a primary view be established from their residence.

D. On October 17 , 2006 , the Notice of Application was posted on the subject property andstaff took photos of the story poles as well as the surrounding area.

E. On October 24, 2006 , staff went to the Kaplan ' residence and established their primaryview according to the procedure stipulated in Malibu Municipal Code (M. ) 17.40.040. 17 whichprovides protection for primary views.

Planning Commssion Resolution No. 07-

Page I of 23

Attachment 1

F. On October 25 2006, planning staff received a letter from the Kaplans expressing theirconcerns with the scope and overall height ofthe project. Staff contacted the applicant and conveyed theKaplans ' concerns and directed the applicant to the M. C. Section 17.40.040. 17.

G. On Januar 20 2007 , revised plans were submitted and on February 3 2007 , story poleswere again placed on the subject property. Staff revisited the Kaplans and took additional photos. Therevised design of a lower single-story ridgeline appeared to have less of an impact to the Kaplans primaryiew. However, Mr. Kaplan indicated at this time that his neighbor at 29107 Cliffside Drive, RalphHoman, had primary view concerns as well. Subsequently, staff contacted Mr. Homan and establishedhis primary view. At that time, it appeared that the Kaplans may have valid concerns with regard to theheight of the structure in excess of 18 feet in height. However, from Mr. Homann s residence, it did notappear that any of the second-story portion would impact his view but rather the most ocean-frontleading edge portion (proposed at 18 feet) may block some blue water view. Since primary viewprotection does not corne into effect until a project exceeds 18 feet in height, staff determined that therewas no primary view impact to Mr. Homann s residence. Staff conveyed this information to applicantwho adjusted his design and story poles.

H. On April 12, 2007 staff revisited the Kaplan and Homann residences and took anotherround of story pole photographs and reassessed the primary view concerns. It appeared that by reducing

the impact to the Kaplans the revised project would have an impact to Mr. Homan s primar view. Thisinformation was conveyed to the applicant who indicated that he would further revise his project.

1. On April 25, 2007 , the applicant submitted a revised design, which put the one-storyportion at 18 feet in height and the two-story portion at 22 feet 9V2 inches.

J. On May 5 2007, the project was re-poled and on May 7th and M;ay 22 , stafftook photosfrom the Homan and Kapl n residences respectively.

K. On May 26 , 2007 , it was relayed to staff that the Kaplans, Mr. Homann and the propertyowner, Bruce Martin had met to discuss his latest proposal and that discussions centered on the removal

or thinning oflarge (view blocking) trees and maintenance of the existing vegetation at the proposed roofheight (to ensure existing blue water views) which could mitigate the impacts of the proposed second-

story structure.

L. On June 16, 2007, the final department review was received and the application wasdeemed complete for processing.

M. On July 15 , 2007 , the project site was re-poled using orange flags to indicate the height ofthe one-story portion at 18 feet and bright yellow flags to indicate the height of the proposed second-

story at 22 feet 9V2 inches. The blufffront, leading edge ofthe structure remained poled at 18 feet with a

wooden two by four, painted black extending the length the structure.

N. On July 16, 2007, staff conducted a final site visit and took another round of photos.Although difficult to see, the story poles and colored flags demonstrated that the proposed structue whenviewed from the elevations of the neighboring residents had the same blue water view blockage at 18 feetas at 22 feet 9V2 inches. This is discussed further in the Site Plan Review Findings and Scenic and Visual

Planning Commission Resolution No. 07-

Page 2 of 23

Findings.

O. On July 25 2007, a Notice of Public Hearing was published in a newspaper of generalcirculation within the City of Malibu. In addition, on July 25 2007, a Notice of Public Hearng wasmailed to all property owners and occupants within a 500-foot radius of the subject property.

P. On August 7, 2007, the public hearing was not opened and the item was continued to adate certain of September 18, 2007.

Q. On August 8 , 2007 , staff facilitated a meeting between the applicant and the Kaplans todiscuss a private maintenance agreement for the trees on the subject property. A private agreement was

reached that consists ofthe onsite trees within the Kaplans' line-of-sight be maintained at the rooflne ofthe proposed addition/remodel so as to shield the Kaplans ITom the structure while maintaining a viewacross the site. This private agreement is not required by or enforceable by the City of Mali bu. It is staffsunderstanding-that a similar private agreement was made with Mr. Homann at 29107 Cliffside Drive.

R. On September 6, 2007, a Notice of Public Hearing was published in a newspaper ofgeneral circulation within the City of Malibu. In addition, on September 6, 2007, a Notice of PublicHearng was mailed to all property owners and occupants within a 500- foot radius of the subject propert

S. On September 18 2007 , the Planing Commission held a duly noticed public hearing onthe subject application, reviewed and considered the staff report, reviewed and considered written reportspublic testimony, and other infonnation in the record.

Section 2. Environmental Review.

Pursuant to the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act GEQA"the Planing Division has analyzed the proposal as described above. The Planning Division has foundthat this project is listed among the classes of projects that have been detennined not to have a signficantadverse effect on the environment and are therefore, exempt ITom the provisions ofCEQA. The PlanngDivision has further detennined that none of the six exceptions to the use of a categorical exemption

applies to this project (CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2). Accordingly, a CATEGORICALEXEMPTION wil be prepared and issued pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15301 Class 1 ( e) and

(f) Existing Facilities - additions to an existing single-family residence and a health and safety protectiondevice.

Section 3. Coastal Development Pennit Approval and Findings.

Based on substantial evidence contained within the record and pursuant to Sections 13. B and 13.9 ofthe City Malibu LCP Local Implementation Plan, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the findings in

the staff report, the findings of fact below, and approves Coastal Development Pennit No. 05-060.

The proposed project has been reviewed by the City s Geologist, Environmental Health AdministratorBiologist, and Public Works Department, as well as the Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACFD).

According to the City s archaeological resource maps, the subject site has a low potential to containarchaeological resources. The project is consistent with the LCP' s zoning, grading, water quality, and


Page 3 of 23

on site wastewater treatment requirements. The project has been determined to be consistent with allapplicable LCP codes, standards, goals, and policies.

General Coastal Development Permit (LIP - Chapter 13)

Pursuant to LIP section 13.9 the following four findings need to be made on all coastal developmentpermits.

Finding 1. That the project as described in the application and accompanying materials, as modifedby any conditions of approval, conforms with the certifed City of Malibu Local Coastal Program.

The project, as conditioned, and with approval of the SPR, MM and APR requests complies with the

required residential standards of LIP Sections 3. , 3.6 and 6. 1 (see Table 2).

Finding 2. The project is located between the first public road and the sea. The project conforms to the

public access and recreation policies of Chapter of the Coastal Act of 1976 (commencing with Sections

30200 of the Public Resources Code).

The project is located between the first public road and the sea. The proposed project and relatedconstruction activities are not anticipated to interfere with the public s right to access the coast, as the site

currently offers no public beach access. There is existing vertical public access at the nearby Point Dume

State Beach to the west; therefore, the project conforms to the public access and recreation policies.

Finding 3. The project is the least environmentally damaging alternative.

Pursuant to the California Environmentally Quality Act (CEQA), this project is listed among the classesof projects that have been determined not to have a significant adverse effect on the environment and iscategorically exempt trom CEQA. The proposed project would not result in signficant adverse effects on

the environment, within the meaning of CEQA and there are no further feasible alternatives that wouldfurther reduce any impacts on the environment. The project wil not result in potentially significantimpacts on the physical environment. The proposed location is the least environmentally damaging

alternative.

The project as proposed has been found to be categorically exempt under CEQA Sections 15301 ClassI(e) and (f) Existing Facilities - additions to an existing single-family residence and a health and safety

protection device. Therefore, the project as proposed has been determined to be consistent with CEQA.

There are three alternatives that were considered to determine the least environmentally damagingalternative.

1. No Project - The no project alternative would avoid any change in the project site, and hence

any change in visual resources. The project site is zoned for residential use and the "no project"

alternative would not accomplish the goals ofthe subject application. Therefore, the "no project"

alternative is not feasible.

2. Alternative Designs - A second-story addition measuring 28-feet in height was originally


Page 4 of23 .

proposed. Due to the project's potential to impact the neighbors ' primary view the project was

redesigned and a series of rooflne reorientations were evaluated in order to lessen the impact on

views. In addition, alternative proposals did not involve the relocation of the existing OWTS.

The OWTS is currently located in the grassy area ofthe middle ofthe project site. A project that

impacts views and does not relocate the OWTS the furthest landward possible does not result in

an environmentally superior project.

3. Proposed Project - The proposed project consists ofaremodel to the existing 4 013 square foot

single- family residence, construction aI , 017 square foot basement/subterranean garage, a 1 373

square foot first-floor addition, a 499 square foot second-floor guest/second residential with an

elevated driveway. The proposed project utilizes the footprint of the existing residence and does

not extend bluffward. The proposed first-floor addition is behind the 50-foot bluffop setback and

exceeds the required 1.5 factor of safety. The proposed second-floor addition is located above the

existing garage area and does not require further landform alteration.

The project as currently proposed has been designed to have no impact on the neighbors ' primarview, to provide a new 10- foot public view corrdor at the intersection of Grasswood Avenue and

Cliffside Drive on the western side of the property, proposes to maintain existing views from

Cliffside Drive through the 10- foot side yard setback on the eastern side of the propert and

relocates the OWTS to the most landward location possible (in the existing driveway area). The

proposed project is the least environmentally damaging alternative.

Finding 4. If the project is located in or adjacent to an environmentally sensitive habitat areapursuant to Chapter of the Malibu LIP (ESHA Overlay), that the project conforms with therecommendations of the Environmental Review Board, or if it does not conform with therecommendations, findings explaining why it is not feasible to take the recommended action.

The subject property does contain clam habitat that is mapped ESHA as depicted on ESHA Overlay Map

2. However, the proposed project does not impact the ESHA as the development is proposed on the

bluffop and not at sea level. Pursuant to LIP Section 4.4.4.A and B, the proposed scope of work is

exempt from Environmental Review Board (ERB) review requirements.

Site Plan Review-Construction Above 18 Feet in Height (LIP Section 13.27.

The LIP requires that the City make six findings in the consideration and approval of a site plan review

for construction in excess of the City s base 18- feet in height up to 24- feet for a flat roof and 28- feet for a

pitched roof (22 feet 9Y2 inches requested). The City requires additional findings (M.M:C. Section

17.62.070). Staff believes the evidence in the record supports the requested site plan review and the

following findings of fact for SPR No. 06-028 are made below.

Finding 1. The project is consistent with policies and provisions of the Malibu LCP.

The project has been reviewed for conformance with the LCP and M. C. As discussed herein, and as

indicated in Tables 2 and 3 , the project, as proposed and/or conditioned, conforms to the certified City of

Malibu LCP. The required findings for the MM request to permit a reduced front yard setback and the

SPR request to permit building height greater than 18 feet up to a maximum of22 feet 9Y2 inches can be

Planning Commssion Resolution No. 07-

Page 5 of 23

made. Based on submitted reports, visual impact analysis and detailed site investigation, the project is

consistent with all policies and provisions of the Malibu LCP.

Finding 2. The project does not adversely affect neighborhood character.

Story poles were placed on the property to demonstrate the project' s potential for aesthetic changes to the

site relative to neighboring properties. As discussed in the chronology, staff visited the site andneighboring properties numerous times, inspecting story poles and evaluating potential public and private

view impacts as well as impacts to neighborhood character. Staff found the existing neighborhood

character to consist of a mix of large residential estates and smaller modest ranch-style homes. The

immediately adjacent ocean side neighbors consist of a two-story and a parial two-story structure with

mature vegetation and similar setbacks. Since the setback of the existing residence is consistent with

other homes in the neighborhood and the requested setback modification affects only the second-story

(the first floor remains as existing), the proposed project wil not adversely affect neighborhood character.

Finding 3. The project provides maximum feasible protection to signifcant public views as required by

Chapter of the Malibu LIP.

There exists no alternative building site location where on site development would not be visible. The

project has been designed to minimize adverse or scenic impacts by proposing the second-story addition

in an area with the least impact to the primary views of the neighbors while creating additional public

scenic viewing opportnities through the site.

The subject property is 103 feet in length with existing development spanning approximately 75 feet (73

percent) across the site leaving a 10 foot six inch (1 0.3 percent) side yard setback to the east and a 16 foot

six inch (16.3 percent) side yard setback to the west. The existing residence is currently located 12 feet

below the road grade at Cliffside Drive. The existing mature vegetation does not allow a public view over

the site except for the visually permeable driveway gate area and 10- foot side yard setback through which

a blue water view is visible. The existing structure is 14 feet in height and the applicants ' request is to

raise the roof height of the single-story portion to 18 feet with the second-story addition at 22 feet 9'i

inches. As the visual analysis shows (see Attachment 5 of the associated Agenda Report), the location

(northwest comer of the site) of the proposed 499 square foot, second-story addition at 22 feet 9'i inches

has the same visual impact to private views as the portion of the structure proposed at 18 feet due to the

change in elevation (approximately 15 feet). There is no further blue water view impact at the higher

height than that which is permitted by the strcture s leading, bluff-front edge at 18 feet.

The proposal includes a new elevated driveway to the second-story, guest unit/second residential unit to

allow for disabled access and provide additional off-street parking. This driveway cut eliminatesapproximately 20 feet of the existing mature vegetation at the street edge and creates a new view corrdor

on the western side of the property allowing a new blue-water ocean view when descending Grasswood .

Avenue toward Cliffside Drive. This view corrdor is similar to the one located at the intersection of

Cliffside and Dume Drives. A condition for a deed restriction has been added which requires theapplicant to continuously maintain the vegetation in the view corrdor. In addition, no new development

is proposed to encroach into the existing 10-foot eastern side yard setback allowing this existing "view

corrdor" to remain unaltered.


Page 6of23

As discussed in the Chronology, story poles were placed on the subject property during various stages ofthe design evolution to demonstrate the height ofthe proposed project and to analyze visual impacts and

staff visited the site on numerous occasions to evaluate potential impacts.

The private view impacts have been addressed to the best of staffs ability. Staff has worked with theapplicant and neighbors to address these concerns. The primar view protection for private views isfound in 17.40.040.A.17 and addresses only construction in excess of 18-feet in height. There islanguage in the LCP Section 6.5 to protect views from scenic roads. Section 6. A. states "Newdevelopment shall be sited and designed to minimize adverse impacts on scenic areas from scenic roadsor public viewing areas to the maximum feasible extent." Section 6. E. states "New development onparcels located on the ocean side of public roads, including but not limited to, Pacific Coast Highway,Malibu Road, Broad Beach Road, Birdview Avenue, and Cliffside Drive shall protect public oceanviews." Section 6. E.1 further states

1. Where topography of the project site descends from the roadway, newdevelopment shall be sited and designed to preserve bluewater ocean views over theapproved structures by incorporating the following measures.

a. Structures shall extend no higher than the road grade adjacent to the projectsite, where feasible.

b. Structures shall not exceed one story in height, as necessary, to ensure thatbluewater views are maintained over the entire site.

c. Fences shall be located away from the road edge and fences or walls shallbe no higher than adjacent road grade, with the exception of fences that arecomposed of visually permeable design and materials.

d. The project site shall be landscaped with native vegetation types that have amaximum growth height at maturity and are located such that landscapingwil not extend above road grade.

2. Where the topography of the project site does not permit the siting or design of astructure that is located below road grade, new development shall provide an oceanview corrdor on the project site by incorporating the following measures.

a. Building shall not occupy more than 80 percent maximum of the linealfrontage of the site.

b. The remaining 20 percent of lineal frontage shall be maintained as onecontiguous view corrdor.

c. No portion of any structure shall extend into the view corrdor.

All of the quoted text above relates to public views and do not apply to private views. In addition, sincethe existing structure occupies 73 percent ofthe lineal frontage with 10.3 percent on one side and 16.3percent on the other, a 20 percent lineal frontage view corrdor is not possible, nor required. Howeverthe existing 10-foot view corrdor and the proposed driveway view corrdor (approximately 10 feet inwidth) (Attachment 6 of the associated Agenda Report - Proposed View Corrdor) combine to providethe maximum feasible public view corrdor -almost 20 percent of the lineal frontage.Given the enhancement in public views, the location of the proposed addition and change in elevation of

Planning Commission Resolution No. 07-Page 7 of 23

the neighbors ' properties , the project as proposed wil have no significant adverse scenic public or private

visual impacts.

Finding 4. The proposed project complies with all applicable requirements of state and local law.

The project has received LCP confonnance review from the City s Biologist, Geologist, Public Works

Department, Environmental Health Administrator and the LACFD. The project must also be approved by

the LACFD and the City of Malibu Environmental and Building Safety Division, prior to issuance of

building pennits. The proposed project complies with all applicable requirements of state and local law.

Finding 5. The project is consistent with the City s general plan and local coastal program.

The project is consistent with the General Plan s rural residential designation for the site. As discussed

herein, the project is consistent with the LCP.

Finding 6. The portion of the project that is in excess of 18 feet in height does not obstruct visuallyimpressive scenes of the Pacifc Ocean, offshore islands, Santa Monica Mountains, canyons, valleys or

ravines from the main viewing area of any affected principal residence as defined in MM C. Section

17.40. 040. 17.

As discussed in the chronology, and in Site Plan Review Finding 3 , story poles were placed on the site in

order to detennine if the project would have a visual impact. Primary view protection does not apply

unless the request is in excess of 18 feet in height. The height of the proposed second-story addition

exceeds 18 feet and has therefore been analyzed for its potential to impact primary views. The subject

property is 12 feet below existing road grade and the neighboring properties which were analyzed for

primary view impacts are approximately 15 feet up from road grade at Cliffside Drive. The difference

between these two elevations (approximately 27 feet) means the 18 foot structural element encroaches

into blue water views more than the 22 feet 9Y: inch structural element on the ocean side of the residence.

There is no advantage visually to limiting the structure to 18 feet in height in the foreground as there is

the same visual effect overall.

Based on the visual analysis and on-site evaluation and analysis, it was detennined that the proposed

project would not obstruct visually impressive scenes of the Pacific Ocean, off-shore islands, Santa

Monica Mountains, canyons, valleys , or ravines from the main viewing area of any affected principal

residence as defined in M. C. Section 17 AO.040. 17.

Minor Modifcation - Reduction in Front Yard Setback (LIP Section 13.27.5)

Pursuant to LIP Section 13.27. 5 the Planning Commission may approve or conditionally approve a minor

modification application only if the Planning Commission affinnatively finds that the proposal meets all

of the following findings:

Finding 1. That the project is consistent with policies of the Malibu LCP.

The project has been reviewed and analyzed for confonnance with the LCP by Planning Division staff

the City Geologist, City Environmental Health Specialist, City Biologist, City ofMalibu Public Works


Page 8 of 23

Department and the LACFD and has been detennined to be consistent with the policies and provisions ofthe LCP (see Tables 2 and 3). The project design proposes a 43 percent reduction in the front yard from65 feet to 28 feet, two inches for the second-story addition only (the first floor remains as existing).These reductions are requested due to the constraints ofthe 30-foot easement on Cliffside Drive. It does

not appear from the development patterns on Cliffside Drive that the easement has been previouslyremoved from the front yard calculations during past years. Staff has confinned that a minormodification was requested in order to pennit the recent, second-story portion over the existing first floorportion of the structure at 29060 Cliffside Drive. Pursuant to Malibu LIP Section 13.27 . B a MinorModification may be granted to reduce setback requirements by no more than 50 percent for front yards.The proposed project meets this requirement.

Finding 2. That the project does not adversely affect neighborhood character.

The setback of the existing residence is consistent with other homes in the neighborhood. Since therequested setback modification affects only the second-story (the first floor remains as existing), theproposed project wil not adversely affect neighborhood character.

Finding 3. The proposed project complies with all applicable requirements of state and local law.

The project has received LCP confonnance review from the City s Biologist, Geologist, Public Works

Department, Environmental Health Administrator and the LACFD. The project must also be approved bythe LACFD and the City of Malibu Environmental and Building Safety Division, prior to issuance ofbuilding pennits. The proposed project complies with all applicable requirements of state and local law

Basements with Coastal Development Permits (M. C. Section 17.62.060)

The M. C. states that "development projects which require a Coastal Development Pennit and whichpropose a basement shall obtain an administrative plan review utilizing the procedures set forth in Section17.62.030. . For purposes of this section only, an APR maybe approved or conditionally approved ifthe project is consistent with M. C. Section 17 AO.040.A.13 . c- f. This section shall only apply to those

development projects for which an application is complete on or after October 27 2004.

The subject application was deemed complete on June 16 2007, and includes a basement in conjunctionwith the CDP request and therefore must also obtain an APR. APR No. 07-095 was assigned to thisproject subject to the aforementioned provision of the M. C. The project has been reviewed forconsistency with M. C. Section 17AO.040. 13. f. This specific section details developmentrequirements pertaining to the construction of basements, subterranean garages, cellars and combinations

of all three. The proposed project confonns to each item enumerated in M. C. Section17AO.040.A.13.

Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area (ESHA) Overlay (LIP - Chapter 4)

The subject property does contain clam habitat that is mapped as ESHA as depicted on the ESHAOverlay Map 2. However, the proposed project does not impact the ESHA as the development isproposed on the blufftop and not at sea level. The project will result in less than significant impacts to;sensitive resources; loss of vegetation or wildlife; or encroachments into an ESHA. Therefore, according

Planning Commission Resolution No. 07-Page 9 of 23

to LIP Section 4. 6(C), the supplemental ESHA findings are not applicable.

Native Tree Protection Ordinance (LIP - Chapter 5)

The proposed project does not require the removal of any native trees. Therefore, according to Section

, the native tree findings are not applicable.

Scenic Visual and Hilside Resource Protection Ordinance (LIP

- Chapter 6)

The Scenic, Visual and Hilside Resource Protection Ordinance governs those CDP applicationsconcerning any parcel ofland that is located along, within, provides views to or is visible from any scenic

area, scenic road, or public viewing area. This project is visible from a scenic road (Cliffside Drive);

therefore, the Scenic, Visual and Hilside Resource,Protection Ordinance applies and the five findings set

forth in LIP Section 6.4 are hereby made below.

Finding 1. The project, as proposed, wil have no signifcant adverse scenic or visual impacts due toproject design, location on the site or other reasons.

As discussed in Site Plan Review Finding 3 , there exists no alternative building site location where onsite

development would not be visible. The project has been designed to minimize adverse or scenic impacts

by proposing the second-story addition in an area with the least impact to the primary views of theneighbors while creating additional public scenic viewing opportnities through the site.

The project as currently proposed has been designed to have no impact on the neighbors ' primar view , toprovide a new 10- foot deed restricted public view corrdor at the intersection of Grasswood Avenue and

Cliffside Drive on the western side of the propert, and to maintain existing views from Cliffside Drive

through the 10-foot side yard setback on the eastern side of the property. The project as designed and

proposed wil have no significant adverse scenic impacts.

Finding 2. The project, as conditioned, wil not have signifcant adverse scenic or visual impacts due to

required project modifcations, landscaping or other conditions.

The project has been designed to avoid any adverse or scenic impacts. The proposed additions aredesigned to be compatible with the existing residence and be compatible with the residential character of

the surrounding neighborhood. Approval of the project is subject to a condition requiring a deedrestriction to maintain the landscaping and vegetation in the offered view corrdor on the western propertedge (Condition No. xx).

Finding 3.

alternative.

The project, as proposed or as conditioned, is the least environmentally damaging

As discussed in A. General Coastal Development Pennit, Finding 3. the project as proposed or asconditioned is the least environmentally damaging alternative.

Finding 4. There are no feasible alternatives to development that would avoid or substantially lessen any

signifcant adverse impacts on scenic and visual resources.


Page 10 of23

Drawing File

Scale

Drawn By

Job

Sheet

Issued Description

krb

n/a

A0.5

martin and costin

Sheet Title

Project Name





310.663.6692





STATE OF CALIFORN

IA

LICE

NSED ARCHITECTKIRK!

BLASCHKE

C-30765REN. 04.30.13

As discussed above in G. Scenic Resources, Finding 1 , the proposed project as conditioned wil result inless than significant impacts on scenic and visual resources.

Finding 5. Development in a specifc location on the site may have adverse scenic and visual impacts butwil eliminate, minimize or otherwise contribute to conformance to sensitive resource protection policies

contained in the certifed LCP.

As discussed above in G. Scenic Resources, Finding 1 , the proposed project as conditioned wil result inless than significant impacts on scenic and visual resources.

Transfer Development Credits (LIP - Chapter 7)

Pursuant to section 7.2 of the LIP the regulations requiring a transfer development credit apply to any

action to authorize a coastal development pennit for a land division. The proposed coastal development

pennit does not involve a land division. Therefore, Chapter 7 of the LIP does not apply to thisapplication.

Grading (LIP - Chapter 8)

There are no findings required by LIP Chapter 8. Table 3 provides the specifications for the exempt and

non-exempt grading quantities proposed. The project is consistent with the LCP' s grading provisions.

Hazards (LIP - Chapter 9)

The project was analyzed by City staff, for the hazards listed in the LIP Section 9 . 7. The projectsite is not subject to significant geologic hazards. The project is set back to the 1.5 factor of safety line

and is not within the wave uprush zone. No substantial risks to life and/or property are anticipatedprovided the recommendations of the geotechnical reports prepared for the project are followed.

Finding 1. The project, as proposed wil neither be subject to nor increase instability of the site orstructural integrity from geologic, flood, or fire hazards due to project design, location on the site orother reasons.

The project was analyzed by staff for the hazards listed in the LIP Section 9.2.A (1-7). Analysis oftheproject hazards included review of the following documents/data, which are available on file with theCity: 1) existing City Geologic data maintained by the City; 2) Preliminary Engineering Geologic and

Geotechnical Report prepared by Donald Kowalewsky dated March 15, 2006; Addendum Response toGeology and Geotechnical Engineering Review dated June 7 2006; and Addendum No.2 to PreliminarEngineering Geologic and Geotechnical Report dated July 3 , 2006. Based on the reports referencedabove, the property is not located within an active earthquake fault zone and no known active faults exist

beneath the proposed project.

The project has been reviewed by the City Geologist and the City Public Works Department for erosion

hazards and bluff retreat. In infonnation submitted by Mr. Kowalewsky, the applicant's geotechnicalconsultant, he states that


Page 11 of23

There are several lines of evidence that indicate that the average rate of bluff

retreat along this portion ofDume Cove has a lesser rate than other parts ofthe

point.

1. Because this is almost the exact middle of the cove, a broad sand beach

exists, therefore, limiting wave uprush against the base of the seacliff.

2. A moderate amount of talus has accumulated at the toe of the bluff. This

indicates that wave erosion at the base of the bluff is infrequent.

3. The propert has a beach cabana/storage building that is visible on aerial

photographs taken in 1952 (as well as 1972). That structure is located in the

toe of the slope and has remained unaffected by erosion for over 50 years.

4. Bedrock strata is dipping into the slope at low angles. A condition that is

very favorable for long term stability.

.. .

Based on the above observations and site conditions it would appear that no retreat has

occurred in 50 years.

The City Geologist is in agreement with this assessment as indicated on the LCP-LIP Geotechnical

Conformance Review Sheet dated August 8, 2006, which states that the project is "Approved from a

geotechnical perspective. Based on the reports submitted and review by the appropriate CityDeparments and LACFD , the project, as proposed, wil neither be subject to nor increase instability of

the site or structural integrty from geologic, flood, or fire hazards due to project design, location on the

site or other reasons.

Finding 2. The project, as conditioned, wil not have signifcant adverse impacts on site stability orstructural integrity from geologic, flood or fire hazards due to required project modifcationslandscaping or other conditions.

As stated in J. Hazards Finding 1 , the proposed project as designed, conditioned, and approved by the

City Geologist, City Public Works Department and the LACFD, wil not have any significant adverseimpacts on the site stability or structural integrty.

Finding 3. The project, as proposed or as conditioned, is the least environmentally damaging alternative.

As discussed previously, the proposed project as designed, conditioned, and approved by the CityGeologist, City Public Works Department and the LACFD, the project wil not result in potentiallysignificant environmental impacts because site and construction design measures have been incorporated

which substantially lessen any potential for adverse effects of the development on the environment. The

project as proposed or conditioned is the least environmentally damaging alternative.

Finding 4. There are no alternatives to development that would avoid or substantially lessen impacts

site stability or structural integrity.


City Geologist, City Public Works Department and the LACFD, wil not have any significant adverse


Page 12 of23

impacts on the site stability or structural integrty.

Finding 5. Development in a specifc location on the site may have adverse impacts but wil eliminate

minimize or otherwise contribute to conformance to sensitive resource protection policies contained in

the certifed Malibu LCP.


City Geologist, City Public Works Department and the LACFD, wil not have any significant adverse

impacts on the site stability or structural integrty and wil provide the required emergency/fire access.

No adverse impacts are anticipated to any sensitive resource protection policies contained in the LCP.

However, pursuant to LIP Section 4.42, the pro

martin full set 07-16

Documents