CITY COUNCIL: Appeal of Design Review Board Decision Approving Demolition & Construction of New Residence

Meeting Date: 7 October 2008
Prepared by: Marc Wiener, Assistant Planner

City Council
Agenda Item Summary

Name: Consideration of an appeal of a decision of the Design Review Board approving
the proposed plans for the demolition of an existing residence and construction of
a new home at Guadalupe 4 NE 5th Street. The appellants are Helen and Mark d’Oliveira, the home owners of the property directly to the south.

Description: The appellant is requesting that the Council overturn the Design Review
Board’s decision to approve the demolition of an existing residence and construction of a new residence on the project site.

Overall Cost:
City Funds: N/A
Grant Funds: N/A

Staff Recommendation: Deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the Design Review
Board.

Important Considerations: CMC 17.10.030 establishes the regulations that apply to
projects within the Single Family Residential (R-1) District. While there is no
specific formula addressing mass and bulk, privacy and views, both the Municipal
Code and the Residential Design Guidelines encourage projects to be considerate
of both privacy and views and that mass and bulk should be consistent with other
structures in the area.

Decision Record: The Design Review Board approved this project on August 23, 2008.
.

Reviewed by:

__________________________ _____________________
Rich Guillen, City Administrator Date


CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR McCLOUD AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
THROUGH: RICH GUILLEN, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: MARC WIENER, ASSISTANT PLANNER
DATE: 7 OCTOBER 2008
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL OF A DECISION OF THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPROVING THE PROPOSED PLANS FOR THE DEMOLITION OF AN EXISTING RESIDENCE AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW HOME AT GUADALUPE 4 NE 5TH AVENUE. APPELLANTS ARE HELEN AND MARK D’OLIVEIRA, HOMEOWNERS OF THE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH.

SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION
Deny the appeal and uphold the Design Review Board’s decision.

BACKGROUND
This site is located on the east side of Guadalupe Street between Fourth and Fifth Avenues and contains a one-story residence. There are two significant trees on the site, one of which is near the center of the property. There is a drainage ditch that runs across the backyard.

The property is not considered an historic resource as it does not meet any of the criteria for significance. A Determination of Ineligibility for listing on the City’s Inventory of Historic Resources was issued on 16 July 2007.

This project was reviewed by the Design Review Board on three separate occasions and
approved on August 23, 2008. The Helen and Mark d’Oliveira, the neighbors of the property to the south, filed an appeal on September 5, 2008.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant proposes to demolish the existing residence and construct a new two-story residence on the site. The residence will include a 926-square-foot main level with a 652- square-foot upper level. The applicant proposes to use horizontal wood siding with a stone veneer at the base of the structure. Site coverage includes the sand set paver driveway, walkway and patio.

PROJECT DATA FOR A 4,000 SQUARE FOOT SITE:
Site Considerations Allowed Existing Proposed
Floor Area 1,800 sf (45%) N/A 1,798 sf (45%)
Site Coverage 556 sf (13%)* N/A 555 sf (13%)
Trees (upper/lower) 3/1 trees 1/2 trees 1/2 trees
Ridge Height (1st/2nd) 18/24 ft. N/A 14 ft./21 ft. 6 in.
Plate Height (1st/2nd) 12 ft./18 ft. N/A 8 ft. 6 in./17 ft. 6 in.
Setbacks Minimum Required Existing Proposed
Front 15 ft. N/A 15 ft.
Composite Side Yard 10 ft. (25%) N/A 10 ft. (25%)
Minimum Side Yard 3 ft. N/A 4 ft.
Rear 3 ft. /15 ft. N/A 25 ft. 10 in.
*Includes a 4% bonus if 50% of all coverage is permeable or semi-permeable.

EVALUATION
Basis for Appeal: The appellant is a neighbor of the applicant’s property and is appealing the Design Review Board’s decision for the following reasons:
• The second-story deck at the front of the home creates a privacy impact.
• The location of the garage and the solid wood fence at the front of the property box them in.
• The proposed design appears massive from the street.

Design Review Board: The Design Review Board reviewed this project on three occasions.
Below is a brief summary of these hearings.
First Concept Review: Based on concerns raised by staff and neighboring property owners, the Board continued this project on 25 June 2008 with a request for the following changes:

• Reduce the size of the second-story and remove the cantilevered elements.
• Reduce the plate height of the garage.
• Remove the “clipped” gables and use a basic gable or hip.
• Present a one-story design to the street.
• Reduce the potential privacy impacts on the neighbor to the south.

Second Concept Review: The applicant revised the plans to accommodate the requests made by the Board. The applicant reduced the size of the second-story, removed the large cantilever elements, and presented more of a one-story design to the street. The applicant removed the “clipped” gables from the design, and reduced the size of the south facing deck to accommodate the neighbor’s concerns.

The Board accepted the Design Concept on 23 July 2008, with the following additional
requests:
• Reduce the second-story plate height and the garage plate height to further reduce the mass of the building.
• Move the south-facing deck at least three feet further to the west to accommodate the southern neighbor’s concerns.

Final Review: The applicant made the requested changes and the plan was approved by the Board on 27 August 2008, with a request for the following additional changes to further address the concerns of the southern neighbor:
• The second-story hall and staircase windows on the southern elevation shall be
installed with obscured glass.
• A lattice screen shall be installed on the south and east sides of the second-story deck to provide additional privacy for the neighbor to the south.

Summary: In summary, staff supports the Design Review Board’s decision for the
following reasons:
• The location of the deck, along with the lattice, will minimize the privacy impact to the southern neighbor.
• Due to the constraints of the site, including the tree at the middle of the property and the drainage ditch, staff supports the location of the garage. The applicant has reduced the plate height of the garage by two feet, to reduce the mass of the garage.
• The size and mass of the structure is compatible with other structures in the area and is consistent with the Design Guidelines
• The applicant has made numerous changes to the plans to accommodate the concerns
raised by the Design Review Board, staff, and neighboring property owners.

RECOMMENDATION
Deny the appeal and uphold the Design Review Board’s decision.