HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-01-14_cityofsanrafael_5c202abc0793254000496dd2136de1aeCITY OF
Meeting Date: January 14, 2014
Agenda Item: 2—
Case Numbers: ED13-074, UP13-046, V13-010,
Community Development Department- Planning SDU13-002
Division Project Plannef�:rt�raig Tambornini (415) 485-3092
P. O. Box 151560, San Rafael, CA 94915-1560
PHONE: (415) 485-3085/FAX: (415) 485-3184
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBJECT: 213 Locust Ave (Orloff Second Unit) - Requests for an Environmental and Design
Review Permit, Use Permit, Variance and Second Dwelling Unit Review to legalize a
320 square foot second unit established within a detached accessory structure in the
designated front yard setback, along with garage and deck additions and demolition of
an unpermitted carport, located on a 22,275 sq. ft. developed residential hillside and
flag lot; APN: 015-081-33; R20 -H District; Eugene Orloff, owner/applicant; File No(s).:
ED13-074, UP13-046, V13-010 and SDU13-002.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The subject application has been submitted to legalize work completed without permits, including
modifications made to an existing undocumented detached accessory structure which is technically
located in a front yard setback of a landlocked, hillside parcel. Staff has concluded that the project may
be approved given that the applicable R20 -H development standards and accessory structure and
second unit requirements have been satisfied, and the findings for required zoning entitlements can be
made.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Planning Commission take adopt a resolution to approve the zoning
entitlements.
PROPERTY FACTS
Address/Location: 1213 Locust Avenue I Parcel Number(s): 015-081-33
Property Size:
22,275 sq. ft.
Neighborhood:
Dominican/Black
Can on
Site Characteristics
General Plan Designation
I Zoning Designation
Existing Land -Use
Project Site:
Hillside Residential
R20 -H
Residential
North:
Hillside Residential
R1 a -H
Residential
South:
Large Lot Residential
R20
Residential
East:
Hillside Residential
R1 a -H
Residential
West:
Single -Family Low Density
Residential
R20
Residential
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case No: ED13-074, UP13-046, V13-010, SDU13-002 Page 2
Site Description/Setting:
The subject property is a landlocked hillside parcel with an irregular panhandle shape, accessed from a
private driveway with an upslope to the northeast (rear) corner of the property. The site is developed with
a single-family residence and an accessory structure that is located along the panhandle (stem) of the
lot; which is within the designated front of the parcel. The property was developed in 1957, within the
Dominican/Black Canyon neighborhood area and surrounded by residential development on large lots
situated between Locust Drive and Gold Hill Grade/San Rafael Open Space (Harry Barbier Memorial
Park).
BACKGROUND
In July 2012 the owner was directed to obtain building permits for an addition being constructed to
extend the existing garage, as well as for work required to demolish an unpermitted carport, to document
and legalize a second unit in a detached accessory structure (no records existed for the unit), and for a
rear yard deck. Plans were submitted to the building department and referred to the Planning Division for
review, at which time the applicant was advised that additional separate zoning entitlements and reviews
were required. An application for required zoning entitlements was filed on October 16, 2013, and
accepted as complete in November 2013.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Pursuant to the San Rafael Municipal Code (SRMC) 14.16.285, the project requires review and approval
of an Environmental and Design Review Permit, Use Permit Variance and Second Dwelling Unit Review
to legalize a 320 square foot second unit established within a detached accessory structure in the
designated front yard setback, along with a 6 -foot extension made to the attached garage, a 940 square
foot elevated (over 30" above grade) attached deck in the rear yard, and demolition of an unpermitted
carport on the side of the structure; located on a 22,275 sq. ft. developed residential hillside and flag lot.
The elevated deck is also subject to design review approval, and the development is subject to review for
compliance with the hillside natural state and gross building area limitations of SRMC Chapter 14.12.
Inter -Departmental Comments
The project has been referred to other City Departments for review and comment, and conditions have
been recommended to assure all City requirements are met.
ANALYSIS
San Rafael General Plan 2020 Consistency:
Additions and repairs to an existing residence, and modifications to legally establish a second dwelling
unit on the property is anticipated and permitted under the Hillside Residential land use designation;
pursuant to Land Use Policy LU -23. The project does not invoke further review for compliance with any
other specific policies of the General Plan 2020.
Zoning Ordinance Consistency:
The following requirements must be satisfied to approve the project:
Table 14.04.030 — Residential Development Standards
The project, as proposed with demolition of the non -permitted carport and pursuit of a variance for
modification of a structure in the required front yard, complies with the applicable R-20 zoning district
standards; i.e., 20 foot front yard, 12.5 foot side yard, 10 foot rear yard, 30 foot height, and 30 -percent
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case No: ED13-074, UP13-046, V13-010, SDU13-002 Page 3
maximum lot coverage allowance. The primary structure setbacks exceed the minimum required and lot
coverage is 16.3 -percent. No change to existing building height is proposed. The accessory structure
setbacks and height area discussed further below. No issues have been identified.
Chapter 14.12 — Hillside Overlay District Standards
The property is subject to the —H overlay district given that it is within a Hillside Residential land use
designation and has a property slope of approximately 26 -percent. The 940 square foot deck and 120
square foot garage addition require review to confirm that the —H districts hillside natural state and gross
building area limits are not exceeded. The property is subject to a natural state requirement of
approximately 51 -percent (i.e., 25 -percent of lot area plus 26 -percent lot slope), and gross building area
of 4,727.5 square feet (2,500 square feet plus 10 -percent of the 22,275 square foot lot area).
The areas of all proposed work have been previously disturbed and graded, including the existing access
driveway, existing area around the studio/second unit, the driveway in front of the residence, graded pad
area for the house and side and rear yards including the side with the former carport (removed) and
relatively level rear yard area. The remaining area along the panhandle and around the detached unit
and upslope to the north of the residence remain in a natural state. Recent work has been completed to
remove fire -hazardous eucalyptus species and new trees and mulch have been installed to restore this
area to a more native condition. The project maintains approximately 15,613 square feet of undeveloped
site area and does not result in any net new disturbed site areas. The resulting 3,634 square foot gross
building area, 6,662 square feet of "disturbed" and developed site area, and "undisturbed" hillside areas
remain in substantial compliance with the —H hillside overlay standards. No issues have been identified.
Chapter 14.16 — Site and Use Regulations
Accessory Structures
Pursuant to Section 14.16.020 an accessory structure is subject to a 15 foot height limit and maximum
30 -percent coverage of required side yard setbacks. The structure would comply with these limitations.
However, pursuant to Section 14.16.020.D no accessory structures can be permitted in a required front
yard. Because there are no permit records for the existing structure and legalization of the unit is
considered an intensification of use, a variance is required for the project to proceed. Findings required
for grant of a variance are discussed below.
Second Dwelling Unit
Pursuant to Section 14.16.285, legalization of the proposed studio second unit on this lot shall be subject
to an owner occupancy deed restriction, shall not exceed 40 -percent of the main building area excluding
the garage (with at least 500 square feet allowed), requires one (1) parking space adjacent to the
driveway and a design that is compatible with the main residence. The project complies with these
standards. However, a detached second unit located within required setbacks also requires use permit
and design review approvals granted by the Planning Commission. Findings required for use permit and
design review approvals have been discussed below.
Chapter 14.22 — Use Permit
In general, the use permit findings required for a second unit that is located within setbacks must
conclude that the use would be in accord with the general plan, purposes and provisions of the zoning
ordinance, and not result in detrimental effects on surrounding properties. Subject to grant of a variance
for the location in the front yard, and grant of concurrent design review for the unit, staff recommends
that the findings for use permit can be made to support the project in this case, based on the conclusion
that the unit would not conflict with the intent of the zoning ordinance, and would provide a suitable
second unit that would not create undue impacts on adjacent neighbors or structures (Exhibit 2).
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case No: ED13-074, UP13-046, V13-010, SDU13-002 Page 4
Chapter 14.23 — Variance
In general, findings required for grant of a variance must be based on special circumstances applicable
to the property, and cannot grant the property a special privilege. The property owner maintains that the
existing structure and unit were built in 1958. Unfortunately, City Building and County assessment
records do not exist to confirm the accessory structure was pre-existing. The original accessory structure
materials do appear to be consistent with the age of the main house. Regardless, staff finds that the lot
characteristics are unique in that the parcel is landlocked, with an irregular panhandle shape. Further, the
property does not maintain a traditional open front yard area along a street frontage. As such, the
location of the accessory structure would not conflict with the intent of the accessory structure setback
restrictions (e.g., to maintain open residential front yard areas). Further, the structure would not appear to
impact the privacy or access to light and air or privacy of adjacent neighbors. The location of the
structure appears to be appropriate and suitable for this property. Staff has recommended findings to
support the proposed variance (Exhibit 2).
Chapter 14.25 — Design Review
The project is subject to design review for construction of a deck in a hillside area over 30" in height and
more than 100 square feet in area, and for a second unit located within a required setback. The minor
garage addition and removal of the unpermitted carport do not trigger design review given that they
involve construction of a ground floor addition on a hillside lot under 500 square feet in size. Further, the
project has not been referred to the Design Review Board because it does not involve any new
significant construction. Rather, the project primarily requires Planning Commission review and approval
of land use entitlements related to the second unit. The pertinent design elements are discussed further,
as follows.
Deck Addition
Minor design review is required for elevated decks over 100 square feet in a hillside area in order to
assure privacy impacts are minimized and that the natural state and design criteria of hillside lots are
met. The deck is essentially in a level rear yard area behind the house which cannot be viewed from off-
site. The deck would not violate the design or natural state requirements, nor create a privacy issue. No
issues have been identified.
Second Unit
The second unit must be found to be in accord with the general plan and purposes and provisions of the
zoning ordinance, including this Chapter 14.25. As discussed in the variance finding section above the
unit would not appear to create any privacy issues for neighbors. Further, as proposed, the design would
be complementary to the existing residence, with horizontal wood and trim and vinyl windows and doors,
which would be painted neutral earth -tone colors. Staff has not identified any issues with the design and
has recommended findings to support design review approval (Exhibit 2).
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The proposed project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA), pursuant to Section 15301 and 15303 of the CEQA Guidelines which exempts minor residential
additions and alterations.
NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING / CORRESPONDENCE
Notice of hearing for the project was conducted in accordance with noticing requirements of Chapter 29
of the Zoning Ordinance. A Notice of Public Hearing was mailed to all property owners and occupants
within a 300 -foot radius of the subject site and the Dominican/Black Canyon Neighborhood Association,
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION - Case No: ED13-074, UP13-046, V13-010, SDU13-002 Page 5
and all other interested parties, 15 calendar days prior to this public hearing. Public notice was also
posted on the subject site 15 calendar days prior to the meeting date.
One written comment has been received expressing concern with the fact that work has progressed
without benefit of permits. No new issues or concerns have been identified that are not addressed in this
report.
OPTIONS
The Planning Commission has the following options:
Approve the application, as presented (staff recommended)
2. Approve the application with certain modifications, changes or additional conditions of approval.
3. Continue the applications to allow the applicant to address any of the Commission's comments or
concerns
4. Deny the project
EXHIBITS
1. Vicinity Map
2. Draft Resolution
3. Public Correspondence
4. Plans
Exhibit 1 - Vicinity Map (213 Locust Ave)
10
I
t
^7
_ N
r -
n
`�%��
49
V /
185
SCALE 1: 3,78
200 0 200 400 !00
FEET)A
700
190
N
Wednesday, January 08, 2014 10:37 AM
Exhibit 2
RESOLUTION NO. 14 -
RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING
ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT (ED13-074), USE PERMIT (UP13-
046), VARIANCE (V13-010), AND SECOND DWELLING UNIT REVIEW (SDU13-002)
FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 213 LOCUST AVENUE
APN: 015-081-33
WHEREAS, on October 16, 2013, Eugene Orloff submitted zoning applications to
legalize a 320 square foot second unit in a detached structure, a deck addition and ancillary
modifications to the existing residence on a 22,275 square foot hillside parcel in the
Dominican/Black Canyon neighborhood area; and
WHEREAS, the applications have been accepted as complete for processing; and
WHEREAS, upon review of the applications, the project has been determined to be
exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to
Section 15301 and Section 15303 of the CEQA Guidelines which exempt minor alterations and
additions made to residential structures and construction of second units in a single-family
residential district; and
WHEREAS, on January 14, 2014, the San Rafael Planning Commission held a duly
noticed public hearing on the proposed zoning entitlements, accepting all oral and written public
testimony and the written report of the Community Development Department staff.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the Planning Commission hereby makes the
following findings to approve the subject Variance, Use Permit and Environmental and Design
Review zoning entitlements:
Findings — Variance (V13-010)
A. Because of special circumstances applicable to the property, consisting of its irregular
panhandle shape, and its condition as a land -locked developed property that does not
maintain a typical front yard condition, the strict application of the zoning requirements that
prohibit an accessory structure in a designated front yard would create a hardship condition
for this property that would not apply to other properties in the vicinity and under identical
R20 -H zoning classification. If the variance were not approved, the existing structure,
which may have been built as a legal non -conforming detached accessory structure, would
be required to be removed. However, the location does not conflict with the intent of the
zoning ordinance, in this case, given the irregular and unique characteristics of this parcel.
B. The variance will not grant a special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other
properties in the vicinity and the same R20 -H zoning district given that the location would
not conflict with the intent of the zoning ordinance as discussed above. Furthermore, the
variance would accommodate conversion of the existing detached accessory structure into a
second unit, and the second unit would comply with all applicable zoning requirements of
San Rafael Municipal Code Section 14.16.285 through grant of concurrent use permit and
design review approvals, which are the same requirements that would apply to other
similarly zoned properties in the vicinity.
C. The variance, as proposed, does not authorize a use not otherwise allowed in the district, as
discussed in finding B, in that it would accommodate conversion of an accessory structure
into a second unit which is a permitted use in the R20 -H district.
D. The project, as proposed and conditioned, would not be detrimental or injurious to property
or improvements in the area or general welfare given that the Planning Commission
exercised its independent judgment and determined that the Class 1 and Class 3 categorical
exemption for the project is appropriate and consistent with the provisions of CEQA in that
the project involves construction of a second residential dwelling unit and residential
building on a residentially zoned parcel, the project has been reviewed and conditioned by
other City departments, and a building permit shall be obtained for all work to assure that
construction shall comply with all of the pertinent health and safety standards that have been
established to protect the occupants of the subject structure and adjacent properties.
Findings — Use Permit (UP13-046)
A. The proposed second unit is in accord with the General Plan 2020 and all purposes and
provision of the zoning ordinance given that, i) the proposed residential additions and
modifications, deck improvements, and second unit are permitted activities in the subject
residentially designated and zoned area, ii) all work would comply with the R20 -H zoning
district requirements for height, setback, lot coverage, natural state and gross building area,
iii) the second unit would not create undue noise or privacy impacts on adjacent neighbors,
iv) the accessory structure has been found to be consistent with the intent of the accessory
structure setback requirements of SRMC Section 14.16.020 based on grant of a variance
(V13-010) for the project, and v) the second unit satisfies all applicable requirements for a
second unit contained in SRMC Section 14.16. 285, along with the concurrent design review
(ED 13-074) required.
B. The use permit to allow a second unit within required setbacks, and conditions thereto,
would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or improvements in the
vicinity, or general welfare as discussed in the above use permit finding and by variance
(V13-010) finding D.
Findings — Environmental and Design Review (ED13-074)
A. The design, as proposed and conditioned, is in accord with the General Plan 2020 and
purposes and provisions of the zoning ordinance, including Chapter 14.25, given that, i) the
proposed residential additions and modifications, deck improvements, and, second unit are
permitted uses in the subject residentially designated and zoned area, ii) the deck addition
would not be visible from off-site and is essentially a ground level rear yard deck over an
existing relatively level yard area, and iii) the second unit would be designed with horizontal
wood siding and trim, and vinyl windows that would be painted a neutral earth -tone color
that complements the main house style, architecture and materials.
-2-
B. The project design will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, nor
materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity given that the project has
been reviewed by the appropriate agencies and conditioned accordingly, as further discussed
in the findings for concurrent use permit (UP 13-046) and variance (V 13-010) above.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the City of San Rafael
approves the Variance, Use Permit and Environmental and Design Review Permit request
subject to the following conditions:
Conditions of Approval — Variance (V13-010)
Community Development Department, Planning Division
1. This variance approval permits a 320 square foot accessory structure to be located in the
designated front yard of the this irregularly panhandle shaped, landlocked, and hillside
parcel, as indicated on the approved project plans, with a six foot (6') side yard setback from
the west side property boundary, sixteen foot (16') setback from the front property boundary
and, to the west side of the existing access driveway easement.
2. Building permits shall be obtained to document construction and improvements made to this
structure, as well as to address all corrections and site improvements as indicated on
approved project plans submitted for this permit. Permits shall be obtained within not more
than one (1) year from date of zoning approval (by January 14, 2015); or as otherwise
directed by the code enforcement or building division.
3. If permits are not obtained within the specified timeframe, or an extension of time submitted,
this approval and/or related zoning entitlements granted for the project shall be deemed null
and void and of no further effect.
4. All work shall be completed within two (2) years from date of this approval.
Conditions of Approval — Use Permit (UP13-046)
Community Development Department, Planning Division
This use permit approval permits conversion of a 320 square foot one-story detached
accessory structure into a studio second unit, located within the front and side property line,
as indicated on approved project plans, and as proposed under SDU13-002, and subject to
conditions of concurrent design review approval ED 13-074.
2. Parking for the studio unit shall be provided within the existing paved driveway apron
adjacent to the driveway access to the garage of the primary residence, as indicated on
approved project plans. The parking space dimensions and location shall be clearly indicated
on plans submitted for building permit.
3. Completion of work approved by this use permit approval shall be subject to the time
limitations specified in variance approval V13-010.
-3-
4. If the accessory structure is improved but not established as a second unit, the structure may
be used only for storage or other uses as permitted by the zoning district, or shall be
removed. If removed, these approvals shall be of no further effect after the time frames to
implement the project have lapsed.
5. An owner occupancy deed restriction shall be recorded for the second unit prior to occupancy
of the unit and grant of a building permit final.
Conditions of Approval — Environmental and Design Review (ED13-074)
Community Development Department, Planning Division
1. Building permits shall be obtained for the project with all work implemented in substantial
conformance with approved plans, i.e., for construction of a 940 square rear yard deck,
removal of a carport, extension of the existing attached garage, landscaping of hillside slopes
of the property, and conversion of a 320 square foot detached accessory into a second unit.
2. Materials and colors for the second unit, deck and garage addition shall be indicated on plans
consisting of earthtone colors and materials, including wood siding, dark composition
roofing and neutral earthtone paint colors.
3. An address shall be requested for the unit from the building division, in a sequence with the
numerical order of the rest of the street.
4. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall satisfy all requirements of Marin
Municipal Water District for a second unit.
5. Construction activities shall comply with City's Noise Ordinance.
6. If, during the course of construction, cultural, archaeological or paleontological resources are
uncovered at the site (surface or subsurface resources) work shall be halted immediately
within 50 meters (150 feet) of the find until it can be evaluated by a qualified professional
archaeologist. The City of San Rafael Planning Division and a qualified archaeologist (i.e.,
an archaeologist registered with the Society of Professional Archaeologists) shall be
immediately contacted by the responsible individual present on-site. When contacted, the
project planner and the archaeologist shall immediately visit the site to determine the extent
of the resources and to develop proper mitigation measures required for the discovery.
7. The applicant shall contact the Planning Division to request a final inspection prior to
obtaining a building permit final.
8. All required/proposed work shall be completed within two years form date of approval.
9. This approval shall run concurrently with and be subject to all conditions of variance
approval V13-010 and use permit UP13-046. If legalization of the proposed work is not
pursued, the property and improvements shall be restored in compliance with the R20 -H
zoning district.
Public Works Department
10. Show the existing and proposed parking dimensions for the single family dwelling and
second unit on the plan, based on the municipal code requirements (Chapter's 14.16 and
14.18).
11. Provide a site plan showing all site drainage existing and proposed. Show all roof drains and
drainage systems on the plan.
12. Include the "Pollution Prevention — It's Part of the Plan" sheet with building permit plans.
The foregoing Resolution was adopted at the regular City of San Rafael Planning Commission
meeting held on the 14th day of January, 2014.
Moved by Commissioner
AYES: COMMISSIONERS
NOES: COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS
and seconded by Commissioner
SAN RAFAEL PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST: BY:
Paul A. Jensen, Secretary
-5-
Larry Paul, Chair
A Concerned Citizen
San Rafael, CA
December 22, 2013
Kraig Tambornini
Project Planner
City of San Rafael
P.O. Box 151560
San Rafael, CA 94915-1560
Dear Kraig Tambornini:
R 'Ct-JV
JAN 032014
PLANNING
This letter is in regards to the upcoming public hearing on Jan 14, 2014 to discuss the
request for permit for 213 Locust Ave. Please present this letter for the record during the
hearing.
Over the last roughly 18 months, I have observed frequent signs of construction work at
the Orloff property at 213 Locust Ave. This includes frequent loud construction activities
and frequent traffic of construction workers and their equipment (e.g., plumbing and
framing supplies) to and from the property (and excludes the significant tree trimming
and removal work done in 2013). Previously, I had assumed this was permitted activity,
but the recent notice of public hearing prompted me to check the public records, which do
not show any permits for this duration.
As you review Mr. Orloff's request, please consider his history of disregard for the
various construction and municipal codes and whether that history indicates if he will
abide by the constraints of the permit. Prior to further consideration of the request, I
would request a thorough review of any existing unpermitted activity if this has not
already occurred. If approved, please set up your most stringent review and enforcement
mechanisms to ensure that the work is contained to the permitted job, done in a timely
fashion, and occurs only during allowed times.
Sincerely,
A San Rafael Resident
,fXf%i8/T 3