Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-005 Cox/McCandless SDR SF Hm AGENDA STATEMENT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: June 22, 2004 SUBJECT: ATTACHMENTS: PUBLIC HEARING: PA 04-005, Cox/McCandless Site Development Review for a New Single-Family Residence on an existing lot (Lot 8) at 11183 Brittany Lane Report prepared by: Pierce Macdonald, Associate Planner o Resolution Approving a Site Development Review for a Single- Family Custom Residence on an Existing Lot (Lot 8) at 11183 Brittany Lane, Subject to Conditions (with Project Plans attached as Exhibit A) Written Statement Letter from Michael Santos, Consulting Arborist, HortScience, dated February 11, 2004 Heritage Tree Protection Plan, prepared by HortScience, dated February 2001 Heritage Tree Ordinance Previously Approved Plans for Home on Lot 8 City Council Resolution Approving Site Development Review for Hatfield Development, PA 85-035.3, on August 12, 1985 RECOMMENDATION: 2. 3. 4. 5. Open public hearing; Receive Staff presentation and public testimony; Question Staff, Applicant and the Public; Close public hearing and deliberate; and Adopt Resolution (Attachment 1) Approving the Site Development Review for a Single-Family Custom Residence on an Existing Lot (Lot 8) at 11183 Brittany Lane, Subject to Conditions. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Hatfield Development Approval On August 12, 1985, the City Council approved Resolution 82-85 for the Site Development Review application for a 175-home, single-family-density residential neighborhood on 88.6 acres of land in the western part of Dublin submitted by the Hatfield Development Corporation, Inc., PA 85-035.3 (included as Attachment 7). The application consisted of Tract Maps 5072, 5073 and 5074. The SDR approval established Conditions of Approval and established development regulations for the subject lot at 11183 Brittany Lane. Lots 1 and 6 to 12, of Block 1 of Tract Map 5073, identified as "custom lots" in the Resolution, were not developed when the subdivision tract homes were built in 1985. The subject property, Lot 8, is one of the COPIES TO: Applicant Project Planner File ITEMNO. ~ i approved custom lots that were to be developed when individual design plans were submitted and approved. Conditions 4 and 12 of that resolution require that Site Development Review applications be approved for the development of the custom lots, as well as various other requirements that are further discussed in the section of this report, entitled Conformance of Project with Hatfield SDR (Council Resolution 82-85). Black Mountain Development (PA 00-009) On December 12, 2000, the Planning Commission approved the Black Mountain Development (PA 00- 009) Site Development Review, which approved the design and location of seven single-family homes on seven lots (Lots 1 and 7 to 12) and approved the Heritage Tree Protection Plan prepared by Nelda Matheny of Hortscience (later updated for City Council in February of 2001 and included with this report as Attachment 4). The Black Mountain project was appealed to the City Council on December 21, 2000. The appeal cited alleged conflicts of the approved plans with the Heritage Tree Ordinance, the Wildfire Management Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, and the Hatfield Development approval. On January 16, 2001, the City Council heard the appeal of the SDR and directed the applicant, Black Mountain, to redesign the project to minimize adverse impacts to the Heritage Oak Trees. The City Council directed the Black Mountain applicants to revise the location of the home on Lot 8 to decrease the front yard setback from 20 feet to 13 feet in depth and to modify the floor plan, thereby eliminating the need to remove a significant limb of Tree No. 340 located on-site (as identified by the Heritage Tree Protection Plan). Tree No. 340 is a healthy mature Coast Live Oak with two trunks that are 26 inches and 40 inches in diameter, respectively. The 26-inch trunk bends down northward, extending towards the home approximately 56 feet along the ground. Black Mountain revised the site plan to reflect the reduced setback and, on February 20, 2001, the City Council approved the redesigned Black Mountain project, upheld the decision of the Planning Commission, and required some additional Conditions of Approval. The Black Mountain custom home on Lot 8 approved by the City Council as part of PA 00-009 provided 2,812 square feet of living space and a 665-square-foot garage. The previously approved Site Plan, Floor Plans and Elevations are included as Attachment 6. The approved building height was 637+/- feet above sea level. The approved site plan for Lot 8 depicted the drip line of Tree No. 340 as five (5) feet beyond the rear of the residence, consistent with the Heritage Tree Protection Plan. The home had the following setbacks from property lines: · 13-foot front yard setback; · 14-foot east side yard setback; · 1 O-foot west side yard setback; and, · 105-foot rear yard setback. Building information and setbacks for the Black Mountain project on Lot 8 approved in 2001 are summarized in Table 1, Comparison of Black Mountain Project to Cox/McCandless Proposal, in the following section of this staff report. In April 2002, during the review of the grading plan for the seven Black Mountain lots, Staff determined that the approved location of the residence on Lot 8 conflicted with the drip line of Tree No. 340. The actual location of the tree's drip line was between 8 and 10 feet beyond the location shown on the site plan approved by City Council as part of the Black Mountain Site Development Review permit, PA 00-009. On August 5, 2003, City Council considered a request by Mr. Jeff Woods of Black Mountain Development to amend the approved Site Development Review permit to allow pruning of the Heritage 2 Oak Tree on Lot 8 (No. 340) by amending Condition 78 and Condition 93 of the approved Black Mountain project, PA-009. Condition 78 of the Conditions of Approval for the project established a tree protection zone around all of the trees on the properties, including Lot 8. Condition 93 required that no work, including grading or construction, was to occur within the tree protection zone. The public hearing to consider the application to amend these conditions was continued to the September 2, 2003 City Council meeting and denied by City Council on September 2, 2003. In December of 2003, the Developer of the Black Mountain project transferred interest of Lot 8 to Ryan Cox. During this time, Black Mountain also transferred interest to Lots 1, 7, 10 and 12, originally part of the Black Mountain SDR, PA 00-009, to other property owners. Lot 7, directly east of the site of the current project was re-designed and a new Site Development Review application was approved by the Planning Commission on March 25, 2003 (Weisser Residence). Also in the project vicinity and a "custom lot," but not a part of the Black Mountain project, Lot 6 was the subject of a proposal for a new single- family home approved by the Planning Commission on April 8, 2003 (Meilsoe Residence). Most recently, the Black Mountain single-family home on Lot 1 was redesigned by the new owner and a new Site Development Review application was approved by the Planning Commission on May 11, 2004 (Loukianoff Residence). The Planning Commission's decision on this project was appealed and was heard by the City Council on June 15, 2004. Current Proposah Cox/McCandless Single-Famil}: Homer PA 04-005 Mr. Ryan Cox and Mrs. Jeanette McCandless request Planning Commission approval of a Site Development Review permit application for a new single-family home on the existing vacant lot at 11183 Brittany Lane (Lot 8), created by Tract Map 5073 in conjunction with Planned Development PA 85-035 (Hatfield Development Corporation, Inc.). Lot 8 is rectangular in shape and 14,450 square feet in size (see Project Plans, Exhibit A of Attachment 1). The northern one-fourth portion of the lot is relatively flat, while the remaining three-fourths of the lot drop off steeply with a 30% to 50% slope. The site includes one large and three moderate-sized oak trees designated Heritage Trees pursuant to the Heritage Tree Ordinance (Attachment 5). Surrounding properties on the north, east, and west sides are designated single-family residential land use as part of the Hatfield PD. ~[he property to the south has an agricultural land use designation and is outside of the City limits within Alameda County. The current project includes grading within 25 feet of an existing Heritage Oak Tree, and the applicant has submitted a letter from Michael Santos of Hortscience, dated February 11, 2004 (Attachment 3), which states that the current project has been found to be consistent with the conclusions and recommendations of the Heritage Tree Protection Plan prepared by Hortscience in February 2001 and approved as part of the Black Mountain project (Attachment 4). Based on this letter, the applicant is requesting to amend the Heritage Tree Protection Plan, to illustrate the correct location of Tree No. 340 on the lot and the new location of the proposed home. The application does not include requests for modifications to the existing drip line or requests to perform any pruning or trimming of trees on the site. ANALYSIS: An outline of the development characteristics of the Cox/McCandless proposal is provided in the table below, entitled Table 1, Comparison of Black Mountain Project to Cox/McCandless Proposal. This table summarizes the development of the Cox/McCandless project, as well as provides a comparison to the previously approved project at the site (Black Mountain) and the Planned Development (PD) Zoning District regulations (Hatfield). The project characteristics, comparisons to the Black Mountain project, and conformance with the Hatfield PD are further described in detail in the paragraphs following the table. TABLE 1 Comparison of Black Mountain Project to Cox/McCandless Proposal Characteristic Black Mountain Cox/McCandless Difference Conformance with 2001 2004 2004 vs. 2001 Hatfield PD (1985) FloorArea 3,477 square feet 2,974 square feet - 503 square feet N/A (2,812 square feet of (2,513 square feet (less 299 square feet living area and 665- living area and 461- of living area and square-foot garage) square-foot garage) less 204 square feet of garage) Setbaclis - Front Yard 13 feet 20 feet +7 feet additional Conforming (20 feet) front yard setback - Rear Yard 105 feet 103 feet -2 feet rear yard Conforming (20 feet) setback - Side Yard (E) 14 feet, 10 feet, -4, Conforming 24 feet aggregate 24 feet aggregate same aggregate (5 feet minimum, 15 feet aggregate) - Side Yard (W) 10 feet, 14 feet, +4, Conforming 24 feet aggregate 24 feet aggregate same aggregate (5 feet minimum, 15 feet aggregate) - Heritage Tree 5 feet from drip line 5 feet from drip line Same Conforming (per Horticultural Report ) Lot Coverage 19.6% 16% - 3.6% Conforming ·(21.2 % with deck) (17.9% with deck) (reduction of 18% (35% maximum) from 2001 project) Max. Height 19 feet from 20.5 feet from +1.5 feet Conforming Measured approved 1985 approved 1985 (25 feet maximum, Perpendicular grade grade increase subject to Site to Grade Development Review) Elevation above +/- 637 feet +/- 639.37 feet + 2.37 feet N/A Sea Level elevation above elevation above sea level sea level Pro]ect Design The proposed residence is designed in a Mediterranean style with stucco and stone accents and fully developed landscaping. The 2,513 square foot home and 461-square-foot garage would complement the architecture and building sizes of the surrounding neighborhood as many of the surrounding homes are in Mediterranean styles with similar colors and materials and floor area. The colors and materials of the proposed home and the existing homes in the neighborhood have a neutral, earth tones palette. The design elements are illustrated in colored elevations, included as Exhibit A to Attachment 1 of this staff report and on file at the Community Development Department. The Landscaping Plan (Sheet L-1 included in Exhibit A of Attachment 1) provides adequate quantities and qualities of trees and shrubs similar to those on other lots in the area and incorporates drought-resistant plantings. 4 The Cox residence is sited on the lot to minimize grading, impacts to views, and impacts to the Heritage Oak Trees. A hipped roof has been incorporated into the multi-form roof design to minimize any impacts to views from neighboring residences. A partial pier and grade beam and slab foundation will minimize the grading necessary for the project. A porch running the length of the rear elevation of the home and partially circling the Heritage Oak Tree, beyond the five-foot setback required as a fire buffer in the Heritage Tree Protection Plan, has been included in the design to maximize the outdoor living space of the home without additional grading. Overall, the project is characterized by high-quality architectural detailing and sensitive site planning, minimizing grading, cut and fill. As conditioned, the proposed project is consistent with the required findings contained within Chapter 8.104 of the Zoning Ordinance, Site Development Review (Section 8.104.070). The Findings and Conditions of Approval proposed for the project are included in the draft Resolution (Attachment 1). Heritage Tree Protection Plan The Heritage Tree Protection Plan as modified by Fire Department conditions of approval approved as part of the Black Mountain project and incorporated into the current project proposal requires that the residence and decking be setback five (5) feet from any existing Heritage Tree drip line. The proposed building and deck will be built at, or beyond, the five-foot setback. Additional recommendations of the Heritage Tree Protection Plan have been incorporated into the Conditions of Approval included in the attached draft Resolution included as Attachment 1 under Conditions 70 to 95. The measures to protect the Heritage Trees on the property are further discussed in detail in the following section. Conformance of Pro]ect with Hatfield SDR (Council Resolution 82 - 85) The City Council Resolution 82-85, approving the Hatfield Development SDR, PA 85-035.3, set forth Conditions of Approval establishing the requirements to be fulfilled prior to the issuance of building permits. In addition, the Conditions of Approval established development standards for the custom lots (Lots 1 and 6 to 12 of Block 1 of Tract Map 5073). Conditions 3, 4, 6, and 16 specifically apply to custom lots and this project. These conditions are listed below with statements regarding the project's conformance with the Hatfield Development SDR regulations: Condition 3. · · · Development regulations for this development are as follows: Front yard setback is 20 feet. Side yard setback is a 5-foot minimum and 15-foot aggregate. Rear yard setback is 20 feet Lots are subject to guidelines of the R-1 zoning district in respect to development criteria such as lot coverage, allowable uses, parking requirements, and definition of terms. The project, as proposed will have the following setbacks from property lines as shown in Table 1, above: a 20-foot front yard setback, where 20 feet is the minimum; a 1 O-foot east side yard setback, where 5 is the minimum; a 14-foot west side yard setback, where 5 feet is the minimum; a 24-foot combined right and left side yard setbacks, where 15 feet is the minimum; and a 103-foot rear yard setback, where 20 feet is the minimum. The project, as proposed, would have maximum lot coverage of 17.9%, where 35% is the maximum for a two-story home in the R-1 Zoning District. In addition, the proposed residence complies with all parking requirements, allowable uses and definition of terms in the R-1 Zoning District. Other applicable conditions of the previous Site Development Review and the proposed project's conformity are as follows: Condition 4. Site grading aggregating in excess of 50 cubic yards shall not occur until a Site Development Review (SDR) application is processed according to Section 8.95.0 (now section 8.104) of the Zoning Ordinance (Site Development Review). Site grading from this project will exceed 50 cubic yards and, therefore, a Site Development Review permit is required as part of this proposal. Condition 6. The height of custom or modified homes shall not exceed twenty-five (25) feet as measured perpendicularly from natural grade.* Skirt heights screening undeveloped, non-living space for custom or modified homes (measured from natural grade to finished floor elevations) shall not exceed a maximum of nine (9) feet.** Deviation and/or refinement of these standards may be considered as part of the Site Development Review process covering these lots. *Height Limit Defined: This condition stipulates the height limit and the methodology for measuring height for the customs lots within the development. The height limit is not to exceed 25 feet and the methodology for measuring height is a parallel line measured 25-feet perpendicular from natural grade (see Figure 1, below, for illustration). Section illustrating perpendicular measurement of height limit Figure 1. **Skirt Height Defined: This condition applies a maximum skirt height of 9 feet as measured from natural grade. A skirt is the area below the lowest living floor, which is utilized for support of a structure. Staff reviewed the project plans and determined that the residence is in conformance with the height limit required by Condition 6. The maximum height of the proposed project is 20.5 feet above natural grade. Natural or existing grade is defined by the Zoning Ordinance Section 8.08.020 as the contour of the ground surface before project grading. City Staff analyzed natural or existing grade based on the ground contours established by the grading plan approved as part of the Hatfield Development SDR, PA 85-035.3 because since that time unauthorized grading had occurred on the site. The ridge height of the home is 639.37+/- feet above sea level. A Condition of Approval, Condition 69, has been included in the draft Resolution (Attachment 1) which requires surveying and certification of floor height and ridge height prior to completion of framing construction to verify actual building height. In addition, as part of this SDR, the Applicant requests a Site Development Review approval for an increase in the skirt height from nine (9) feet to 9.375 feet on the south end of the residence due to the steepness of the slope. The slope of the lot in this area is approximately 29%. Condition 16. This Condition requires that project grading performed within 25 feet of the drip line of existing on-site or off-site trees shall be addressed by a horticultural report and the recommendations and findings of that report incorporated into the grading and improvement plans of this project. The Applicant has submitted the Heritage Tree Protection Plan prepared by Nelda Matheny of Hortscience in February of 2001 (included as Attachment 4) in conformance with Condition 16 and the City of Dublin Heritage Tree Ordinance, adopted on December 7, 1999 and later amended (Attachment 5). Protection measures established by the Heritage Tree Protection Plan have been incorporated into the Conditions of Approval for this project (Conditions 70 to 95). A recommended Condition of Approval found in the draft Resolution attached to this report, Condition 87, requires that the Applicant/Developer guarantee the protection of the Heritage Trees on the subject property through placement of a cash bond, CD or other security deposit with the Public Works Department in the amount equal to the valuation of the trees as determined by the City's selected arborist (See page 5 of Attachment 5, Dublin Municipal Code § 5.60.100.). The cash bond or other security shall be retained for a reasonable period of time following the occupancy of the residence, not to exceed one year. The cash bond or security is to be released upon satisfaction of the Director of Community Development that the Heritage Trees have not been damaged or endangered by construction activities during the process of developing the lot. The cash bond or security deposit must be forfeited as a civil penalty for any unauthorized removal or destruction of a Heritage Tree. Additionally, a recommended draft Condition of Approval, Condition 92, would require that any future owner be made aware in real estate disclosure documents of the location of the Heritage Trees, the provisions of the Heritage Tree Ordinance, and the provisions of the Guide to Maintenance of Native Oaks, a document that is required to be prepared by an arborist under this Site Development Review (Condition 86). Furthermore, a draft Condition of Approval, Condition 95, is recommended that would allow Staff to field check the survey, prepared by a licensed surveyor, provided in the project plans for verification purposes (the survey may be found in Exhibit A of Attachment 1). This condition would require that the Applicant stake all of the comers and dimensions of the building and foundation, including all projections such as the deck, prior to installing the foundation. These stakes would remain until the foundation had been inspected by the Building and Planning divisions. This condition will assist Staff in verifying the consistency between the survey and the physical building location and current site conditions. As conditioned, the proposed project is consistent with Condition 16 of the Hatfield Development Corporation SDR and the Heritage Tree Ordinance as grading performed within 25 feet of the drip line of existing Heritage Oak Trees is addressed by the horticultural report prepared by HortScience in February of 2001 (Attachment 4). The recommendations and findings of the HortScience report have been incorporated into the grading and improvement Conditions of Approval of this project to assure the protection of the Heritage Oak Trees. Conformance with Dublin General Plan The General Plan land use designation for the project site is Single Family Residential at a density of 0.9 to 6 units per acre. The proposed project conforms to density and intensity of use envisioned in the 7 General Plan as the project would be built at a density of 3 units per acre, which falls within the General Plan density range for the site. There are no Specific Plans for this area. Noticing In accordance with State law, a public notice was mailed to all property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the proposed project to advertise the project and the upcoming public hearing. A public notice was also published in the Valley Times newspaper and posted at several locations throughout the City. To date, the City has received no comments or objections from surrounding property owners or tenants regarding the current proposal. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The environmental impacts of this project were addressed in the Negative Declaration prepared for PA 85- 035 Hatfield Development Corporation Planned Development Rezoning, Annexation and Site Development Review of which the subject lot was a part. The Negative Declaration for the project was prepared and adopted by City Council in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), State CEQA Guidelines and the City of Dublin Environmental Guidelines. CONCLUSION: The Cox/McCandless project is in conformance with the Dublin General Plan, City Council Resolution 82-85, the Zoning Ordinance and the Heritage Tree Ordinance. The home is well-sited and well-designed for the lot and compatible with other neighboring residences in the subdivision. Impacts to views will be minimized by the hipped roofline and design of the residence. No modification to the location of the drip lines of the Heritage Oak Trees on-site or off-site, and no modification to maximum allowable building height are included in the Applicant's proposal. Conclusions and recommendations of the Heritage Tree Protection Plan prepared by Hortscience have been incorporated into the draft Conditions of Approval in Attachment 1. As conditioned, the Findings included in the attached Resolution (Attachment 1) can be made. RECOMMENDATION: Staffrecommends that the Planning Commission: open the public heating; receive Staffpresentation and public testimony; question Staff, Applicant and the Public; close the public heating and deliberate; and adopt the Resolution (Attachment 1) approving the Site Development Review for a Single-Family Custom Residence on an Existing Lot (Lot 8) at 11183 Brittany Lane, subject to conditions. G:LPA#~2004\04-005 Cox Family ResidenceXPC SR SDR 6-22-04.doc GENERAL INFORMATION: APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: Ryan Cox 80 Descanso Drive, #1205 San Jose, CA 95134 LOCATION/ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER: 11183 Brittany Lane, Lot 8, Dublin, CA 94568 941-2775-037 EXISTING ZONING: GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Planned Developmem (PD) Zoning District, PA 85-035 Single Family Residential