CITY COUNCIL: Appeal of Planning Commission's Decision to Deny Two Unit, Multi-Family Residential Project

Meeting Date: 5 April 2011
Prepared by: Marc Wiener, Associate Planner

City Council
Agenda Item Summary
Name: Consideration of an appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision to deny a two-unit, multi-family residential project for a site located on San Carlos Street 3 SE of 7th Avenue. The appellant is Old Mill Properties LLC.

Description: The appellant is requesting that the Council overturn the denial of the project. The appellant argues that the project complies with City standards and should be approved.

Staff Recommendation: Grant the appeal.

Important Considerations: The RC District was established to provide an appropriate location for residential uses and limited commercial uses and to be a transition zone between the more intense activities in the CC and SC Districts and the activities in the R-1 District.

During the Planning Commission hearings several concerns were raised by the
Commission about the project. However, the primary point of debate centered on whether the applicant should be required to place the parking at the rear of the lot.

Decision Record: On 12 January 2011 this project received a split 2-2 vote and was denied due to a lack of a motion for approval.

Attachments:
• Attachment “A” Reduction Plans
• Attachment “B” Appeal Application/Appellant Letters
• Attachment “C” Data Tables
• Attachment “D” Planning Commission Hearing Summary
• Attachment “E” Police Parking Evaluation
• Attachment “F” General Plan Policies
• Attachment “G” Commercial Design Guidelines
• Attachment “H” Correspondence
• Attachment “I” Planning Commission Staff Report (1/12/11)
• Attachment “J” Alternative Site Plan

Reviewed by:

___________________________________ _____________________
Heidi Burch, Assistant City Administrator Date

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR McCLOUD AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
THROUGH: HEIDI BURCH, ASSISTANT CITY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: MARC WIENER, ASSOCIATE PLANNER
DATE: 5 APRIL 2011
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S DECISION TO DENY A TWO-UNIT, MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT FOR A SITE LOCATED ON
SAN CARLOS STREET 3 SE OF 7TH AVENUE. THE APPELLANT IS OLD MILL PROPERTIES, LLC.

BACKGROUND & PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project site is located on San Carlos Street three southeast of Seventh Avenue in the
Residential and Limited Commercial (RC) District. The lot was previously developed
with two small cottages that were used for commercial and residential purposes. The
structures were condemned by the City and demolished in May 2010.
The applicant is appealing the Planning Commission’s denial of the proposal to develop
two adjacent lots, each with a multi-family residence. One lot fronts on San Carlos Street
and the other fronts on Mission Street. The lot which faces San Carlos Street (DR 10-24)
is the subject of this staff report, while the lot facing Mission Street (DR 10-25) is the
subject of a separate report.
The proposed multi-family dwelling on San Carlos Street is a 3,200-square-foot Spanish
style structure. The project includes a 2,371-square-foot main residence, a 412-square
foot apartment and a 417-square foot garage. The apartment is located on the lower level
and has a separate entry as well as a kitchen and full bathroom. The project includes
three parking spaces as required by code (see attachment “C” for more information).
The structure is clad with stucco siding, a clay tile roof and includes unclad wood
windows. The front elevation presents an entry element, a balcony and single wood
garage door. The garage door is located 22.5 feet from the sidewalk and is recessed
behind the front balcony. No variances are being requested.


Planning Commission Review: The Planning Commission reviewed this project at four
separate hearings (see attachment “D” for a hearing summary). Due to a conflict of
interest, one commissioner was required to step down during the review process. On 12
January 2011 both projects received a split 2-2 vote and were denied due to a lack of a
motion for approval.
Since there was no majority vote to approve or deny the project, there are no formal
Planning Commission findings that accompany this appeal. During the hearings several
concerns were raised by the Commission including mass and scale, architectural design,
landscaping and safety (see attachment “D”). However, the primary point of debate
centered on whether the applicant should be required to place the parking at the rear of
the lot.
BASIS FOR APPEAL
The property owner is appealing the project denial for the following reasons (see
attachment “B” for more information):
• The proposed project is consistent with the Zoning Code and Commercial Design
Guidelines.
• The determination that parking should be at the rear of the property is unfounded
and cannot be tied to the Zoning Code or Design Guidelines.
• Parking in the back is an impractical notion that is too costly and would result in a
financially disastrous project.
EVALUATION
This section of the staff report discusses the General Plan, Zoning Regulations and
Design Guidelines that should be used by the City Council in its deliberation. Staff notes
that the City Attorney was required to step down due to a conflict of interest and did not
provide staff with any legal counsel for this project.
General Plan
The General Plan land use designation for this site is Commercial/Residential. Page 1-15
of the General Plan states:
“this area is intended to provide for a mix of residential dwellings and a limited
range of office and service uses in scale with the character of the community. Less
intense commercial uses and visitor accommodations are allowed in this area.
Mixed-use developments of commercial and multi-family residential uses at a
maximum density of thirty-three (33) units per acre are allowed. This area is also
appropriate for public service uses.”


The General Plan envisions residential, limited commercial, public services and mixeduse
developments for this area. The traditional character of the RC district is quite
eclectic and contains single-family residences, multi-family structures, mixed use
structures, commercial structures and public services. The proposed multi-family
residential use is consistent with the intent of the General Plan and the traditional
character of the District.
There are several goals, objectives and policies in the Land Use Element of the General
Plan that provide guidance on project design, which are summarized in Attachment “F”.
Objective 01-11 was the focus of much of the Commission’s debate and encourages
pedestrian-oriented commercial and multi-family districts that are integrated into the
residential character of the community. The Commission was split on whether the
proposed design, that includes vehicle parking towards the front of the site rather than at
the rear, was inconsistent with this objective.
Staff notes that there are challenges to placing parking at the rear of this site. This site is
narrow, steeply sloped, and includes a large significant tree that constrains the potential
location of parking. Placing the parking at the rear would require a sloped driveway.
Sloped driveways often require tall retaining walls and expose more of the mass of a
structure to the street, as well as presenting safety concerns due to the limited lines-ofsight
when approaching the street. These challenges should be taken into consideration
as well as the concerns raised by the Commission that placing the parking near the front
of the site is not pedestrian friendly.
Zoning Regulations
The Zoning Designation for this site is Residential and Limited Commercial (RC). CMC
Section 17.14.010.C states that the purpose of the RC District is:
“to provide an appropriate location for permanent and transient residential uses,
service and office uses, and limited retail uses that do not adversely impact the
residential neighborhood. This district is intended to provide a transition and
buffer between the more intense activities in the CC and SC districts and the less
intense activities in the R-1 and R-4 districts.”


CMC Section 17.14 establishes the range of permitted and conditional uses that are
allowed in this district. Multi-family residential projects with a density between 0-22
acres are considered a permitted use by the Zoning Ordinance. CMC Section 17.68.030
defines a multi-family dwelling as:
“a building or group of buildings on a single building site that contains two or
more dwellings, each with its own facilities for parking, living, sleeping, cooking
and eating. This classification includes condominiums, townhouses, and
apartments.”
The proposed structure includes a 2,371 square foot main residence with a 412 square
foot apartment. The apartment has a separate entry, bathroom, cooking and sleeping
facility, and includes a designated parking space. Based on the above definition, the
project qualifies as a multi-family dwelling. Staff notes that the Zoning Code and
Housing Element encourage a mix of unit sizes to provide a wide range of housing
opportunities.
Design Guidelines: CMC Section 17.14.100 states that the “Basic standard of review in
the commercial district is whether the project constitutes an improvement over existing
conditions – not whether the project just meets minimum standards.” CMC 17.14.110
indicates that the Commercial Design Guidelines have been adopted to assist in the
design review process and that “Proposed projects need not strictly comply with every
Guideline to be approved but deviations should be minor and reasonably related to good
design principles and site conditions.”
Attachment “G” includes a list of some of the relevant Commercial Design Guidelines
that the Council should consider. In summary, the Guidelines encourage buildings to
provide visual interest, complement the rhythms established by other buildings in the
immediate vicinity and encourage building materials and colors to respect the traditions
already established in the commercial district.
The project provides visual interest and is consistent with the heights of other buildings
between Seventh and Eighth Avenues on San Carlo Street. The structure is larger than
the neighboring building to the south, however, the neighboring building is undersized
compared to the other buildings in the vicinity.
With regards to materials, the applicant is proposing an off-white stucco siding, clay tile
roofing and wood windows. Spanish style architecture with the proposed materials is
traditionally used in the commercial district. The proposed color also respects the
traditions and context of the commercial district.

Safety: The Carmel Police Department reviewed the plans and conducted a site visit in
order to evaluate the safety of the proposed parking designs (see attachment “E”). The
Police Department determined that there were no undue traffic and safety problems
arising from the construction of the driveway as set forth in the plans.
Use Permit: The construction of basement floor space is permitted in the commercial
district with the approval of a use permit (CMC 17.14.015). Floor space qualifies as a
basement if the distance between the exterior grade and finished floor above is one-foot
or less. In the original proposal a portion of the lower level dedicated to storage and
mechanical equipment qualified as a basement space. The applicant has since revised the
design so that no portion of the lower level qualifies as a basement. As a result a use
permit is no longer required.
Summary: The City Council should discuss the following questions:
• Is the project consistent with the General Plan?
• Does the project comply with the Zoning Requirements for the RC District?
• Is the project consistent with the Commercial Design Guidelines?
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Council make the following motion:
1) Grant the appeal for DR 10-24 (San Carlos Street) and direct staff to prepare
findings and conditions for approval.