HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRB 2016-11-09 #3SAN RAFAEL
THE CITY WITH A MISSION
Project Planner: Alan Montes (415)485-3397
REPORT TO DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
SUBJECT: 64 Oakmont Ave. — Environmental and Design Review for a new 6,498 sq. ft. single-family residence
with a second dwelling unit on a hillside parcel; APN: 010-121-19; Single Family Residential (R1a-H)
Zone; Curt Cline, Applicant; Ryan Ashley, Owner; Fairhills Neighborhood; Project File: ED16-057.
PROPERTY FACTS
Location General Plan Designation
Project Site: HRR
North: HRR
South: HRR
East: HRR
West: HRR
Lot Size
Required: 43,560 sf (1 Acre)
Proposed: 54,704 sf (1.3 Acres)
Zoning Designation
R1 a -H
R 1 a -H
R 1 a -H
R1 a -H
R1 a -H
Existing Land -Use
Residence
Residence
Residence
Residence
Residence
Lot Coverage
Allowed: 13,676 sf (25%)
Proposed: 6,406 sf (11.7%)
Height*
Gross Building Area
Allowed: 30'
Allowed: 6,500 sf
Existing: 16'6"
Existing: 4,700 sf
Proposed: 24'
Proposed: 6,498 sf
Parking Natural State
Required: 3; 2 covered, 1 uncovered Required: 33,523 sf (61.28%)
Proposed: 5; 2 covered, 3 uncovered Proposed: 38,704 sf (70.75%)
Tree Removal
Setbacks
Total (No./Species): 3 trees; 2 pine, 1 juniper
Required
Proposed
Requirement: 9 trees
Front:
20'
90'
Proposed: 9 trees; 9 oaks
Side(s):
12'6"
55"
Rear:
25
40'
* Hillside building height is measured from natural grade to top of roof/structure
at all points of the structure.
SUMMARY
The subject project is being referred to the Design Review Board (Board) for review of site and design
improvements for a new single-family residential located on a hillside parcel, as required pursuant to
Section 14.25.040(B)(1)(a) of the San Rafael Municipal Code. The Board's recommendation will be
forwarded to the Zoning Administrator. Based on review of the applicable design criteria, which is
discussed in detail below, staff finds that the project adequately addresses Zoning Ordinance
requirements. However, Staff is looking for the DRB's recommendation of a modern design on a hillside
parcel, the appropriateness of the colors/materials, and the appropriateness of the landscape plan.
These items are discussed in more detail below.
BACKGROUND
The 54,704 sq. ft. site is currently developed with an approximately 4,700 sq. ft. residence. The
residence was initially 3,116 sq. ft. in size when constructed in 1955. In 1992, the residence went
through a substantial approximately 1,800 sq. ft. addition and remodel.
Site Description & Setting:
The lot is located on a knoll with a significant amount of pine, oak and bay trees located throughout the
site and primarily along the perimeter. The project site is located on a hillside lot with an average slope
of 36.28%. The site will be accessed directly from Oakmont Avenue. Lastly, there is no unified
architectural style in the immediate area surrounding the site.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant proposes to construct a new two-story, 5,891 sq. ft., single-family residence and a 607
sq. ft. detached second unit, located 60' south-east of the single family residence. The gross building
square footage for the property will be 6,498 sq. ft. The single family residence includes six bedrooms,
an office, a media room, a 538 sq. ft. garage, 5 full bathrooms and 3 half baths. The second unit
consists of a bathroom, kitchenette and bedroom.
Three (3) significant trees (2 Pines and 1 Juniper, 50", 39", and 30" in diameter) are proposed to be
removed for the proposed project. Nine (9) replacement oak trees have been proposed. The majority of
these trees would be planted along the southwest and eastern property lines.
The project is proposing a contemporary -modern architectural building design. The proposed materials
and colors consist of clear natural anodized finish aluminum framed windows and doors and barnwood
siding painted acoustic white. The glass walls, facing north, will not receive direct sunlight and the other
glass walls will be screened by overhangs and trellises.
ANALYSIS
General Plan 2020 Consistency:
The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan on the following policies:
➢ Land Use — 8 (Density of Residential Development)
o The project is proposing a single family residence and a second dwelling unit on a site
designated single family and zoned for single family residences. Both uses are
permitted.
➢ Land Use — 12 (Building Heights)
o The project is consistent with the height requirement in the General Plan. The General
Plan designates the area at which the project is located as having a maximum height of
30 feet. The project proposes 24 feet.
➢ Housing — 2 (Design That Fits into the Neighborhood Context)
o The existing neighborhood has no single architectural style and the current project is
respecting the existing setbacks and natural setting. The project will also have minimal
effects on the adjacent properties given that the nearest habitable structure will be
approximately 100 feet away.
➢ Neighborhood — 2 (New Development in Residential Neighborhoods)
o The project will provide excess parking, improve the image of the neighborhood and
respect the existing landforms and natural features. The project is only required to
provide three parking spaces, but they've chosen to provide five, due to the limited
amount of street parking on Oakmont. The project will provide a physical improvement
in the neighborhood, including new site landscaping, including the addition of native oak
trees.
2
Zoning Ordinance Consistency:
Chapter 4 — Single Family Residential District
Section 14.04.040 (Residential District) of the Zoning Ordinance identifies the development standards
of the Single Family Residential (R1a-H) Zoning District. As proposed, the project complies with the
regulations for this District including the front, side, rear yard setbacks, lot coverage, height, and land
use.
Chapter 12- Hillside Development District
Section 14.12.030 A of the Zoning Ordinance establishes limits to the height of structures to avoid
excessive building bulk, natural state, gross building square footage and design criteria. None of the
walls of the project exceed 20 feet in height while located within the stepback area and conforms to the
height standards. The new structure and site improvements are being built within the existing
developed area and are taking precautions to preserve significant trees, the structure is also complying
with the gross building square footage requirement. The hillside design guidlines criteria will be
discussed below.
Chapter 16 — Site and Use Regulations
➢ Second Dwelling Units (14.16.020)
• This project contains a second dwelling unit located on the project south end of the
property. The second unit meets the criteria for setbacks, lot size, entrance, parking, size
limit, and density.
Chapter 25 — Environmental and Design Review Permit
The project is subject to an Environmental and Design Review (ED) as it's proposing a new residence
on a hillside lot. The review criterion includes the following relevant topics:
Site Features and Constraints:
➢ The proposed project is respecting the site features as the building footprint will be in the same
location of the existing residence and the only trees to be removed will be replaced with three
new trees for each tree removed.
Access, Circulation, and Parking
➢ The project meets all access, circulation, and parking requirements from the various City
departments. The project proposes two (2) additional uncovered parking spaces, as parking is
limited on Oakmont Avenue. The site is not subject to the single-family residential, hillside
parking requirement as Oakmont Avenue is wider than 26' at this location.
Architecture
➢ This section suggests that the projects architecture be harmoniously integrated in relation to the
architecture in the vicinity. The neighborhood doesn't have a single consistent architectural
design. The majority of the homes in the area are also hidden behind the natural hillside
landscaping, including the proposed residence. The criterion also recommends that the design
creates points of interest, which this structure will do specifically with the cantilevered second
level over the pool and koi pond.
Materials and Colors
➢ The review criterion suggests earth/woodtone colors as well as other colors which are
appropriate for the architecture. The exterior colors are composed of satin, white and glass.
Staff finds the proposed colors are architecturally appropriate, but is looking for the Board's
review on this matter. The criterion also suggests that glare -reducing and color -harmonizing
finishes may be required on glass surfaces when they constitute fifty percent (50%) or more of a
wall or building face, such as along the northwest and southwest building elevations. Staff would
like the Board's thoughts on these items.
3
Landscape Design
➢ The project is making minimal changes to the existing landscaping and natural state. Three (3)
significant trees are proposed to be removed. Significant trees are defined as oaks that
measure six -inches in diameter and other trees that measure 12 -inches in diameter at four and
one-half feet above the root crown. The project is proposing to replace them with a total of nine
(9) new oak trees, primarily located on the project south end of the property.
Hillside Design Guidelines
Hillside Architectural Character
➢ The color recommendations prefer colors that fit in with the natural setting in order to be less
visible from the surrounding community. Staff finds that this site is nestled into the hillside in a
way that limits the visibility of the structure from public vantage points.
➢ The Hillside Design Guidelines discourages flat roofs, except in small non-visible areas or when
approved by the Design Review Board. Staff finds the proposed roof structure appropriate as it
will minimize the height of the structure and is only visible from a limited area.
For the full list of Hillside Design Guidelines regarding the architectural character please see Exhibit 2.
NEIGHBORHOOD CORRESPONDENCE
Notice was sent to property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the site and the Fairhills
neighborhood association within 15 days of the board meeting. Notice was also posted on the site a
minimum of 15 days prior to the meeting. Staff received two inquiries from adjacent neighbors. One
inquiring was regarding what was actually going to happen on the site. Staff explained the project and
showed the neighbor the plans. The neighbor commented that the design was gorgeous and that he
can already visual the house being there. The second inquiry was regarding the construction and
management plans. Staff requested that the neighbor submit the construction concerns in writing to
staff to be considered for mitigation in the conditions of approval. These written comments are attached
to staff's report as Exhibit 3.
CONCLUSION .
Staff recommends approval of the project with possible minor design and site changes, as
recommended by the Board. Specifically staff would like feedback on the color palette, the
contemporary/modern design, and the location of the new trees on the site.
EXHIBITS
1. Vicinity Map
2. Hillside Residential Guidelines- 'Hillside Architectural Character'
3. Public Comment
*The site has installed story poles.
Full-sized plans have been provided to the DRB members only.
4
Exhibit 1 — Vicinity Map
Exhibit 2
MAT Hillside Architectural Character
Sara Rara(I's Hillside Residential Architecture should develop a semi -rural character with
a strong rc -lationship to the natural setting. New buildings should incorporate the following
elements and characteristics:
0 Simple, one and two story buildings in recessive colors with pitched roofs, accented with
appropriate architectural features.
® Buildi sg and woof forms should be "broken" into compositions of smaller components
to reflect the irregular forms of the hillside setting.
® Building forms should be "stepped" to conform to the site topography. Extensive use
of rooAop terraces at lower stories, verandas, and other defined outdoor spaces are
encouraged.
4 Strong shade and shadow patterns created by careful variation of planes in building
elevati ms. Large cantilevered projections and lame overhangs are discouraged on
downh 11 elevations.
a _ Hillside Residential Architecture in San Rafael should reflect the character of the city's
landscape and climate. While no one architectural "style" is desired, architectural elements
that are- c naracteristic of rural buildings are preferred. The use of porches, courtyards,
a verandas, .;loping roof forms and natural materials are encouraged.
53
1. Buildir..g Form
New Hillsile Residential Architecture in San Rafael should continue the dominant pattern
of one ane two story buildings with tree canopied spaces around them.
s
I
The vi:.ual contrast between areas of light - and shadow gives buildings depth and
substanx. All buildings should have shadow relief created by modest overhangs, minor
projections (greater on uphill elevations), recesses and plan offsets. Large unbroken
expanses of wall should be avoided.
2. Roof Forms and Plan Offsets
Give careful considerations to views of rooftops from other hillside areas, adjacent roads and
uphill properties. V:�,
a
54
Gabled, t ip and shed roof forms at a low to moderate pitch are encouraged. Moderate
overhangs on downhill elevations to create strong shadow lines are desirable. For sloped
roofs, long; unbroken roof lines should be avoided. Changes in roof pitch orientation should
be accom ranied by plan offsets on primary elevations.
Iir'-••r .�,�r r,� r. r,�--'r1-. .Ur- PI�1 .`t r� . ,i�.r fll :{ .1. { r... '1 e�,/.{.
NOT ACCEPTABLE
'r" •rr � .{... •s '�.e i •'r• r r Irrl fll'r r
ACCEPTABLE
A large huilding's bulk may be reduced by breaking the roof form into smaller parts,
reflecting the irregular forms of the surroundings, 'There should be a consistency of roof
pitch acrd Design among separate roof components. Abrupt changes in eave heights require
plan offse:s to make transitions between building components.
1
Flat roofs that require membrane or built up roofing materials are discouraged except in
small and non-visible areas or when approved by the Design Review board.
Allow small areas of fiat roofs only in
small less visible areas.
55
3. Multi -Building Projects
Most slop.ing sites large enough for multi -building projects are highly visible from distant
locations. Views from the site from the neighborhood and other off site locations should
be given strong design consideration.
Multi -building developments should be designed with visible differences. This may be
achieved }through materials, colors, forms and facade variation. Other techniques for
reducing the visual impact of multi -building projects are:
• Site buildings with different floor elevations to achieve height variation.
Site units or buildings with different floor elevations to
achieve height variation.
• Buildin,;s located near hillside rims have higher visibility. These buildings should be sited
in a staggered arrangement and screened with planting to minimize a "wall" effect.
• .Avoid long, continuous building masses that create a "wall" effect and inhibit views.
• facade:, should be articulated to produce shadows through wall setbacks, recessed
openings, porches, verandas, moderate overhangs, projecting windows.
• Rooflin-Is should avoid extended horizontal lines. Pitched, gabled and hipped roofs are
more appropriate for hillside sites.
56
' ' 4. Building Materials, Texture and Color
P , Color scicetion should show evidence of coordination with the predominant colors and
values of the surrounding landscape. This is to minimize contrast of the structure with its
backgrou_id when viewed from the surrounding community.
Roof colt rs should tend toward darker earthtones. Darker colors are less conspicuous when
viewed frim a distance.
a. The following building materials are encouraged:
I . • Exterior Walls
- Wood siding (fire resistance is an important consideration here).
- f;xposed wood structural members.
. - Natural colored brick or stone masonry.
- Natural colored cement plaster.
* Roofs
- - lire resistant wood shakes with thick butts, with Fire Department approval.
- flat Concrete Shingles of earthtone color.
- Flat Clay Tile of carthtone color.
a - Composition shingles (with thick butts) of earthtone color.
2 _ b. The following materials are discouraged:
• Exterior Walls
- targe areas of glass.
- Leflective glass.
- Elastic materials made to resemble masonry or stone.
- good shingles and shakes.
• Rc ofs
�a
- f nigh contrast or bright colors.
X-uilt up roofing, if seen from above, except in small areas.
- f[ighly reflective or shiny materials.
t
- Non -fire resistant materials.
L S. Walls, Fences and Accessory Structures
Fence,;, walls and accessory structures should be designed to be compatible with adjacent
buildings. Patio covers, greenhouses, storage spaces and other ancillary structures should
be located and designed to respect views and other special conditions of highly visible
57
sites.
® Solid fences and walls along public streets have a negative impact on the streetscape and
surrounding neighborhoods. Open fence design is encouraged on public streets in
hillside areas to emphasize opportunity for views from the public environment.
• Fences and walls over 3 feet in height that face public streets should provide a fully
landscaped buffer at least 5 feet deep on the street facing side of the fence or wall.
The following. wall and fence materials are encouraged:
• Colcred concrete.
• SpIit.-faced concrete masonry in natural colors.
• Stone and brick masonry. –,
• Walla with natural colored cement plaster finish.
• Wood.
• Detailed Wrought Iron (for use in gates, and other small areas).
• Open wire fencing (with Design Review Board approval).
• Iron bar fencing. _
The following wall and fence materials are discouraged:
-- Chain link or open wire, except when heavily screened by planting.
— Corrugated Fetal.
Bright colored plastic or plastic coated materials.
— Reed Materials.
• Retaining walls associated with lots are limited to:
a. Upsltpe (from the structure) walls not to exceed four (4) -feet in height (unless
apprcved by the Design Review Board). Terraced retaining structures may be
utilized which are separated by a minimum of three (3) feet and appropriate
landscaping. 1A.10I
-W
b. Downslope (from the structure) walls not to exceed three (3) feet in height unless
approved by the Design Review Board, Where an additional retained portion is
necessary due to unusual or extreme conditions (such as lot configuration, steep slope
or -oad design), then the use of terraced retaining structures shall be considered on
an individual lot basis. 'Terraced walls shall not exceed three (3) feet in height.
® Free standing wall setbacks along front yards shall be varied to avoid creating an
unbroken, uniform streetscape. 'no height of such walls shall not exceed 4 feet unless
approved by the Design Review Board.
® Where fences and walls occur on privately -owned property within slope areas, fence/wall
design., shall be as uniform as possible.
Q Continuous rear yard fences and walls across the tops of slopes shall be coordinated in
design and, use of materials.
Wall s ;tbacks on slopes shall not allow more than four feet of solid wall or fence to
( show above the sight line projected along the slope angle.
Several small retaining walls can be screened.
Retaining walls shall be designed with smooth, continuous lines that conform to the
topography. Maximum wall height at the base of slopes along roadways shall not exceed
4 feet in order to avoid a contained, channel -like effect.
• Retaining wall structures holding back grade to accommodate a patio or terrace shall
conform to the natural hillside profile as much as possible. Excessively high retaining
walls a: -e prohibited.
i,
In dock: construction, the distance between structure and grade shall conform to the
` natural hillside profile as much as possible. Excessively high distances between structure
and grade are prohibited.
M
Alar montes
rirom:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Hi Alan,
Frank Smart <fmsmart@jps.net>
Wednesday, October 26, 2016 6:08 PM
Alan Montes
'Pamela Ouaknine'; 'Marc Langenberg'; 'ROGER'; 'Brian Savard'; 'Mary Kay Yamamoto'
Partial list of issues for the project execution plan for 64 Oakmont Ave. and the Public
meeting 9 Nov. '16
It was good meeting briefly with you yesterday and the architect.
Here are some points that should be considered for this project;
1. What is the overall projected construction duration and completion date?
2. What is the scheduled start date?
3. The City to Survey/Photograph the newly over laid streets adjacent to 64 Oakmont Ave.
in order to have a condition baseline prior to the heavy equipment for this project being
mobilized. All damage to be repaired at owners expense.
?arking along the north side of Oakmont Ave. between 45 and 64 not to be allowed do to
safety reasons, since at either end of this zone there are blind curves. If autos are parked
there it will force cars out into the oncoming traffic lanes.
5. Contractor parking should be restricted to Wildwood Way when parking off site.
6. All dumpsters to be positioned off street.
7. When large trucks; i.e. concrete, equipment transporters, dump trucks, lumber trucks, etc.
should have a flagman on Oakmont while entering or leaving the project site for safety
reasons.
8. Staging areas and material storage to be confined to the project site and not on the city
streets.
9. `",ontact person or persons for the owner via phone and or their e-mail address.
10. As we hear comments from the neighbors we will let you know.
Cheers,
Frank
415-250-8973
