Admin PD Permit - 2014ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION OF THE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
February 13, 2015
PLN2014-311 (APD) Application of Andy Kwitowsky for an Administrative
PLN2014-281 (TRP) Planned Development Permit (PLN2014-311) to allow the
Kwitosky, A. construction of a new two-story single family residence with a
detached garage and associated Tree Removal Permit
(PLN2014-281) to allow the removal and replacement of two
cedar trees, located at 233 E. Rincon Avenue in the P-D
(Planned Development) Zoning District.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
That the Community Development Director take the following action:
1. Approve the Administrative Planned Development Permit, incorporating the attached
findings, to allow the construction of a new two-story single family residence with a
detached garage, and tree removal permit to allow the removal and replacement of two cedar
trees, subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission find that this project is Categorically Exempt
under Section 15303, Class 3 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pertaining
to the construction of single-family dwellings.
Type Proposal Allowance/Requirement* Compliance(Y/N)
General Plan Designation 4.31 units/ gr. acre 6-13 units/gr. acre y
(Low to Medium Densit Residential)
Zone District Designation P-D (Planned Development) - N/A
Net Lot Area 6,365 sq. ft. N/A N/A
Gross Lot Area 10,087.7 sq. ft. (est.) N/A 1'
Building Area
First Floor
Second Floor 1,48? sq. ft.
2,864 sq. ft. (45%) y
Garage 400 scL ft.
Total Buildin Area 2,863 sq. ft.
Site Utilization
Building Coverage:
2,382 sq. ft. (37%)
2,546.7 sq. ft. (40%) y
Private Open Space: 783 sq. ft. 750 s . ft.
Primary Bld. Setbacks
Front (west):
Interior Side (north): 20 Feet
5 Feet (l0-Feet 2"`~ story) 20 Feet
5 Feet or'/~ Bld. Wall height
y
Street Side (south): 12 Feet (25-Feet Garage) 12 Feet (25- Feet for Garage)
Rear (east): 48 Feet, 5-Inches (5-Feet Garage) 5 Feet
Garage: 25 Feet 25 Feet
Height 28 Feet, 9-Inches 35 Feet
(2-stories) (2 %z stories)
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 44.9% .45 ~'
Administrative Planned Development Permit
PLN2014-311 - 233 E. Rincon Avenue
Page 2 of 4
Parking 2 covered 1 covered, 1 uncovered 1'
'
Landscape/Trees Front & Back Yard Front Yard
d I t standards This flexibi 1
lity is intended to promote
*The P-D (Planned Development) Zoning distnct does not stipulate specific eve opmen
developments that are more consistent with site characteristics and would result in an optimum quantity and use of open space. As the P-D
zoning district allows uses and types of development that is (are) determined to be in conformance with its underlying General Plan land use
designation, both the R-D and R-M zoning districts (which have corresponding Low-Medium Density General Plan designations) should be
considered as a basis for comparable uses and types of development. As the development standards of the R-D zoning district requires 750 sq. ft.
of open space per unit, in comparison to the R-M which only requires 300 sq. ft. of open space, staff has provided the development standards of
the R-D zoning district for comparison as they would generally result in a development more in keeping with intent of the Planned Development
Zoning District (i.e. to maximize the quantity and use of open space).
ANALYSIS
Considerations in review of application (CMC § 21.42.040) I'~
1. Will the traffic generated from the development avoid adverse affects on traffic conditions on abutting y
streets?
2. Does the layout of the site provide adequate vehicular and pedestrian entrances, exit driveways, and
y
walkways?
3. Will the arrangement of off-street parking facilities prevent traffic congestion and adequately meet the
y
demands of the users?
height, and material of walls, fences, hedges and screen plantings ensure harmony
Will the location
4
Y
,
.
with adjacent development and/or conceal storage areas, utility installations, or other potentially unsightly
elements of the project`?
5. Does the project maximize open space around the structures, for access to and around structures, and
Y
the establishment and maintenance of landscaping for aesthetic and screening purposes?
6. Does the project minimize the unnecessary destruction of existing healthy trees? Y*
7. Will the project enhance the overall appearance of the city by improving the appearance of individual y
development projects within the city?
8. Will the project complement the surrounding neighborhoods and produce an environment of stable and
Y
desirable character?
9. Does the project enhance the city's character and avoid an adverse aesthetic impact upon existing
Y
adjoining properties, the environment, or the city in general?
inative
i
i
1'
mag
ve,
10. Will the project promote the use of sound design principles that result in creat
hout the city and which avoid monotony and
throu
i
d
li
g
gn
es
ty
solutions and establish structures of qua
mediocrity of development?
11. Will the project promote maintenance of the public health, safety, general welfare, and property
Y
throughout the city`?
12. Is the project consistent with the city's general plan and all applicable design guidelines and special
Y
plans? __,__ ,_~~„ ,,,, ;„~r, nA„,~ar r~Pdar ,2 'tR-inch Atlas Cedarl the
*:The project plans call for the removal oT two reasonanry neai~uy ovum «~~~ ~~-*-~~~~~~ --~~~~- - ___. __ _ _ ___
removal of the trees, which occur near the middle of the property, cannot be reasonably avoided by redesigning, or reducing the
sizc of the building. As such, the project minimizes the "unnecessary' destruction of trees in that all trees, except the two in
direct contlict with the structure and utilities, are to be protected. Moreover, the applicant has agreed to plant two 36-inch box
trees (Olive & Maple) as replacements onsite (reference Attachment 6 -Tree Removal and Replacement Planting Plan).
If the answer is "No" to any of the above, list the number and response as to how the project can
comply with the applicable considerations required pursuant to CMC § 21.42.040.
Number Response
N/A
Materials/Use Description
The subject property is a vacant, corner lot located on the north side of E. Rincon Avenue, east
of S. Second Street. As a rectangular lot (with the exception of the corner), the property runs
Administrative Planned Development Permit
PLN2014-all - 233 E. Rincon Avenue
Page 3 of 4
longer east to west, and is bounded by a 14-foot alleyway to the east (rear) and asingle-family
residential property to the north (interior side). Whereas the property address is 233 E. Rincon,
this address is temporarily shared with the adjoining lot to the north, having only recently been
recognized as having been legally subdivided in compliance with the Subdivision Map Act as
two-legally separate lots as part of a Certificate of Compliance issued April 14, 2014. A new
address will be assigned to the subject property once a building permit is issued.
The design of the proposed two-story single-family residence and detached garage is influenced
by Craftsman and California Bungalow architecture. The material palate includes Hardi (fiber
cement) horizontal panel siding, asphalt shingle roofing, cultured stone (chimney & seat wall)
and v-grove vertical siding (under gables) for accents. The residence includes a covered front
porch and functional, second-story balcony on the front facade, outdoor patio, redwood trellis,
and exposed second-story rafter tails on the south elevation (facing Rincon Avenue), a covered
patio on the east elevation at the rear of the property will also be constructed. The north
elevation, as with the rest of the home, incorporates a mixture of Victorian grid and fixed pane
windows with wood trim frames (reference Attachment 4 -Project Plans).
The exterior Hardi panel siding will be painted slate blue (Benjamin Moore -Normandy 2129-
40) with an off-white trim around the windows, front porch columns, trellis and eaves (reference
Attachment 5 -Color Elevation -Partially Outdated). This color combination is in keeping
with the street (232 E. & 240 Rincon Avenue), as well as those in the nearby Alice Avenue
Historic District (e.g. 150 Alice Avenue) as illustrated in Attachment 5 -Nearby Residences.
While the home will be larger than those in the project vicinity, staff worked with the applicant
to reduce the pitch, and height of the roof and entry-feature to minimize the impact atwo-story
design would have in a predominantly one-story neighborhood. Please note that the color
elevation is partially outdated in that it reflects the design of the building before staff s
recommendations. It also reflects a standing seam metal roof, whereas the project now proposes
to include a composition shingle roofing to be consistent with the surrounding residential
properties. As a Condition of Approval, Staff has required a revised Color Elevation prior to
building permit submittal.
Public Comments Received Explanation/Kesponse
No public comments were received during the noticing period. The applicant provided a
neighborhood acknowledgement form for 233 E. Rincon Avenue (the adjoining neighbor) who
did not express any concerns regarding the proposed project or associated tree removal.
Attachments:
1. Findings for Approval
2. Conditions of Approval
3. Location Map
4. Project Plans
5. Color Elevation -Partially Outdated
6. Nearby Residences
7. Tree Removal and Replacement Planting Plan