CITY COUNCIL: City's Volumetric Standards Modifications

Meeting Date: 3 November 2009
Prepared by: Sean Conroy, Plng & Bldg Services Manager

City Council
Agenda Item Summary

Name: Consideration of modifications to the city’s Volumetric Standards, as established in CMC Section 17.10.030.

Description: The City’s volumetric standards establish the maximum amount of exterior volume that may be built on sites located in the Single-Family Residential (R-1) District.

The Planning Commission recommended modifications to the volumetric standards.

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

Staff Recommendation: Request the Council to provide direction on this issue.

Important Considerations: The City adopted standards several years ago, limiting the amount of exterior volume that could be constructed as part of new development in the Residential (R-1) District. The standards were meant to address concerns about the size of new homes and their affect on the City’s character.

Decision Record: The Planning Commission recommended some modifications to the City Council on 8 July 2009.

Reviewed by:

__________________________ _____________________
Rich Guillen, City Administrator Date

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY PLANNING AND BUILDING
STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR MCCLOUD AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: SEAN CONROY, PLANNING & BUILDING SERVICES MANAGER
THROUGH: RICH GUILLEN, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
DATE: 3 NOVEMBER 2009
RE: CONSIDERATION OF MODIFICATIONS TO THE CITY’S VOLUMETRIC STANDARDS AS ESTABLISHED IN CMC 17.10.030.

BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION
The City adopted standards several years ago, limiting the amount of exterior volume that could be constructed as part of new development in the Residential (R-1) District. These standards were meant to address concerns regarding the size of new homes and their effect on the character of the City. The Municipal Code defines exterior volume as:

“The total space occupied by all structures located above average grade, expressed in cubic feet and measured from the exterior wall and roof surfaces of each building.”

The following volume factors are used to determine the total allowed exterior volume of new construction:

Existing Volume Factors for R-1 District
Maximum Exterior Volume (Cubic Feet) Per
Square Foot of Floor Area
One-Story Elements of the Building
Two-Story Elements of the Building
Located under a pitched or sloping roof greater than 3:12 pitch
12 11
Flat roof 3:12 or less pitch 11 10

For example, a new 1,800-square-foot, one-story residence with a pitched roof would be allowed up to 21,600 cubic feet of volume (1,800 x 12). Once a project has been through the design review process, the approved plans are sent to a consultant to calculate the actual proposed exterior volume. Projects that do not comply must revise the plans.

A small committee was appointed to review the City’s volumetric standards and make recommendations on the appropriateness of the standards. The Committee includes:

􀂉 John Thodos, Architect
􀂉 Bill Strid, former Planning Commission Chair
􀂉 Sean Conroy, Planning & Building Services Manager (facilitator)

The Committee determined that the volume requirements have been effective, but it recommended some modifications. The Planning Commission reviewed these recommendations on 8 July 2009. The following is a summary of the Committee’s recommendations, followed by a staff response and the recommendation from the Planning Commission.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
1) Revise the volume factors as shown below.
Proposed Exterior Volume Factors for R-1 District
Maximum Exterior Volume (Cubic Feet) Per Square Foot of Floor Area
One-Story Elements of the Building Two-Story Elements of the Building
All buildings
11 10

Staff Response: The Committee recommended reducing the volume factors by one to further reduce the mass and scale of new projects in the Residential District. This would reduce the allowed volume for a standard 1,800-square-foot residence by 1,800 cubic feet. This recommendation also grants flat-roof structures the same volume factor as pitched-roof structures.

One criticism of the volumetric standards is that they can limit creativity in design. Many of the older, character-defining homes in the City could not be built under today’s volume standards, much less if the standards became more stringent. The City’s current height, setback, volume and floor area requirements, along with the Design Guidelines and the design review process, provide sufficient opportunities to limit mass and bulk. Staff does not support a reduction in the allowed volume factors as proposed.

An alternative to changing the volume factor for flat-roof structures is addressed in a separate item on this agenda regarding green building incentives. A potential incentive would be to allow additional volume for flat-roofed structures only when the flat roof is to be used for solar panels.

PC Review: The Planning Commission concurred with the Committee’s recommendation to reduce the volume factors by one and to grant flat-roofed structures the same volume factor as pitched roof structures.

2) Discourage subterranean parking garages on sites that require a sloped driveway that create a “ramp” effect. Specify in the code that subterranean parking should not qualify as basement space and should always be counted as above-ground floor area.

Comments: This recommendation is consistent with the Design Guidelines, which discourage subterranean garages that create a ramped driveway. Staff concurs with this recommendation since ramped driveways typically add to the visual mass of a structure.

Subterranean garages now may qualify for basement bonus floor area. Staff could support modifying the code to indicate that garage space always count as above-grade floor area, thus removing the incentive to place a garage underground.

PC Review: The Planning Commission concurred with the Committee’s recommendation regarding subterranean garages.

3) If a volume consultant submits a project for design review, require the volume calculations to be prepared by another consultant.

Comments: The City has three consultants that perform volume verifications. All three also work as architects in the City. The recommendation of the committee is that the City ensure that if a consultant submits a project for design review, a separate consultant
perform the volume study. Staff concurs with this recommendation. Since this is an administrative matter, the Council requires no action.

PC Review: The Planning Commission concurred with the Committee’s recommendation regarding consultant reviews.

The Planning Commission included an additional recommendation that was not discussed by the Committee. This recommendation was to appoint a study group to analyze if volumetric standards also should be established in the Commercial Districts.

LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM (LCP)
Any proposed changes to the zoning ordinance constitute an amendment to the LCP and would require Coastal Commission approval.

OPTIONS
The Council may wish to discuss at least the following options:
1) Make no changes to the City’s Volumetric Standards.
2) Direct staff to prepare an ordinance addressing all of the recommendations of the Volume Committee and the Planning Commission.
3) Direct staff to prepare an ordinance addressing some of the recommendations of the Volume Committee and the Planning Commission.

RECOMMENDATION
Provide direction on potential modifications to the City’s Volumetric Standards.