DS 21-004 (Yonekura): Consideration of a Final Design Study and associated Coastal Development Permit for the demolition of an existing carport and 719-square-foot rear portion of an existing one-story residence, and the construction of a 1,073-square-foot, two-story addition at the rear of the residence and a 240-square-foot, detached garage in the front setback of a residence located on Mission, 3 southwest of 13^th Avenue in the Single-Family Residential (R-1) Zoning District.(APN: 010-162-002)

CEQA Action: Staff recommends that the proposed project be found categorically exempt from CEQA requirements, pursuant to Section 15303 (Class 3) – New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures.

The property is a 4,000 square-foot, interior lot developed with a single-story, 1,652 square-foot residence, including a 400-square-foot carport. The residence’s exterior wall cladding is vertical board and batten. Most windows are aluminum casement with no divided lights; however the front window is an aluminum divided light window and one wood divided light window remains on the south elevation. The residence has a low-pitched, side-gabled wood shake roof.

The applicant has submitted plans to demolish a 719-square-foot, rear portion of the residence and construct additions totaling 1,073 square feet, consisting of a 755-square-foot main floor addition and a 318-square-foot 2nd floor addition.  A new 240-square-foot detached garage is proposed at the northeast corner of the property in the front 15-foot setback, as well as a new 9’-6” wide permeable paver driveway through the right-of way. The applicant is also proposing new landscaping which the City Forester, Sara Davis, has reviewed and approved (Attachment 5, sheet L1.1).

Concept Design Study Hearing Conditions of Approval: At the April 14, 2021 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission passed a motion to accept the Concept Design Study with specific recommendations. The following are the recommendations made by the Planning Commission, followed by a staff response:

1.   The north-facing, 2nd story side windows at the staircase and master bedroom closet shall have obscure glass to protect the north neighbor’s privacy.

Staff Response:  The architect is proposing obscure glass in both north-facing upper-floor windows and has also reduced the size of the north-facing stair window to 24” wide x 42” high to reduce the perceived privacy impact. Additionally, the 2nd story window, previously located in the closet, has been re-located to the hallway just outside of the master bedroom instead.

Finally, the applicant has adjusted the staking and flagging to show the height of the shifted addition.

2.   All fencing on top of a retaining wall shall be stepped back from the face of the wall by a few inches so the height can be measured to the top of the wall and not the bottom. The applicant shall replace the existing 7’ to 7.5’ fence at the existing non-conforming height.  The rear west fence shall comply with the City’s height requirements which allow a 6’ tall solid fence stepped back from the edge of the retaining wall below. If additional height is desired, the fence can be topped by a partially-open 1’ tall lattice.

Staff Response: The applicant has chosen to install the proposed fence directly on top of the retaining wall since the north side yard is narrow at 4’-1” in width in some areas. Stepping the fence back from the face of the wall would require that the retaining wall encroach further into the narrow 4-‘1 north side yard.  The height of the fence, therefore, must include the height of the retaining wall.

The existing fence is located on a brick retaining wall and is 7 to 7.5’ in height.  The applicant is proposing to construct a new retaining wall and fence. At the April 14^th Concept Planning Commission meeting, the north neighbor expressed concern about lowering the height of the fence separating the properties to 6’-6”.  The applicant has responded to the north neighbor’s concern by proposing a 1’-6” tall retaining wall topped by a 6’ tall fence, which has an overall height of 7’-6” along the north property line. 

Finally, the applicant has decided to also request a 1’-6” retaining wall topped by a 6’ tall fence along the rear west property line for privacy. According to CMC 17.10.030.E(1), “Approval of taller fences and walls require approval from the Planning Commission.” Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the request since half of the existing rear fence is located on a retaining wall due to the lot slope.  Approval of a 7’-6” fence and retaining wall this will maintain the existing fence heights for the majority of the fence’s length.

3.  The applicant shall revise the plans to shift the 2nd story addition to the south to provide better sunlight and circulation to the north neighbor.

Staff Response: The architect has complied with this requirement and has shifted the 2^nd story north wall of the master bedroom closet 3’ to the south and the north wall of the 2^nd story stairway 2’-6” to the south for a total setback of 6’-1” (Attachment 5, sheet A6.0b and A1.0). Finally, the north wall of the first floor bathroom and laundry room was also shifted 1’ back from the north property line for a total setback of 4’-1” at the first floor. The architect has also cut back the 2^nd story eaves on the north side to reduce mass and the impact on the north neighbor’s solar access. A Sun Study is provided (Attachment 5, Sheet A.6.0b).

However, despite these changes to the setback of the upper-floor, the architect's Sun Study (Attachment 5, sheet A6.0b), depicts that the sun will be partially blocked by the addition for part of the year.  The Sun Study depicts that in the summer months at noon, the sun will be directly overhead and the addition will not interfere with the north neighbor’s access to sunlight. However, in the winter, spring, and fall months at noon, when the sun has a lower angle, the proposed 2^nd story addition will cast a shadow on the north neighbor’s patio and residence.  Based on the architect’s drawing, if the 2^nd story addition were shifted to the south approximately 1’-6” it would allow noontime sun to reach the neighbor’s courtyard during the fall and spring months in addition to the summer months. However, this Sun Study is not sufficient to provide a comprehensive understanding of the potential impact on the north neighbor’s light because it only depicts noontime light, and not how the light and shadows change throughout the day. While the Commission did not previously require the architect to submit a shade study, if the Commission is concerned regarding the impact of the proposed addition on the light reaching the north neighbor’s south patio and bedroom, the Commission can continue this item and require the submittal of a more comprehensive shade study.

The neighbor directly to the north of the project, Ms. Williams, has sent staff a new email stating that the issues with the 2^nd story windows and fence height have been resolved, but that she still has concerns about the massing of the proposed addition (Attachment 4).  Staff visited Ms. Williams’s property to view the staking and flagging and noted that the 13’ tall gable of the 1st-floor, north side bathroom and laundry room is not depicted in the staking and flagging. While the architect has shifted this lower-floor addition to the south by 1’, this only locates it 4-1” from the north property line and the eaves 3’ from the property line. For comparison, the existing single story residence is 5’-10” from the property line and has a sloped roof which tapers down to 9’-6” in height closer to the north property line. Since this 13’ tall first-story gable overlaps with the north neighbor’s patio, staff is concerned that it will appear massive. Additionally, since there is a significant-rated Monterey Pine Tree at the south side yard, the City Forester, Sara Davis, is requiring that the south side 1^st-floor foundation maintain the proposed 7’ setback from this Monterey Pine tree.

Staff has drafted Condition of Approval #29 requiring that north wall of the 1^st floor bathroom and laundry room be moved one additional foot to the south for a total of a 5’-1” setback from the north property line to decrease the mass and bulk of the addition. The architect can then re-distribute any floor area lost to other parts of the house, since the south side of the residence cannot be shifted closer to the Monterey Pine tree. This condition of approval also requires that the Office/Bedroom #1 on the 1^st story south elevation maintain a 7’ setback from the significant Monterey Pine tree to the south.

In regard to the 2^nd story, the north neighbor, Ms. Williams states, “I would like the second story to be moved 3ft more to the south. I still believe I will be losing sun to the vegetation growing in my yard. I had two realtors come to see my house after the story polls were moved and they both said the closeness of the new construction to my house would definitely effect the value of my house” (Attachment 4).

In staff’s opinion, while a 6’ setback is reasonable for a 20’-9” 2^nd story addition (which is 3’-3” lower than the 24’ maximum height), the addition appears imposing when viewed form the north neighbor’s property. Additionally, the architect’s sun study indicates it will affect light to the north neighbor’s property during the winter months.  Staff recommends that the upper-floor be shifted an additional 1-6” to 2’ to the south, provided that the building foundation maintain a 7’ setback to the Monterey pine tree on the south side of the residence.  This has been included as Condition of Approval #30.

The Planning Commission will have the opportunity to view the revised staking and flagging depicting the shifted addition during the Tour of Inspection on the day of the meeting.

OTHER PROJECT COMPONENTS

Finish Details: Design Guideline 9.5 encourages the use of natural materials such as wood in conjunction with stucco that are also compatible with the village-in-a-forest context. Residential Design Guidelines 9.2 through 9.3 advise, “Avoid windows and doors that are out of proportion with the human form.”

Staff Analysis:  The 2-story addition and new detached garage will be clad with board and batten siding to match the existing residence. The body color of the residence will be painted Kelly Moore “Dry Lake” white and all doors and windows will be painted “Breezy Indigo” (Attachment 5, sheet 20). While the photograph of the white paint color does not convey the hue of white that is proposed, the architect will have a paint chips showing both paint colors available for viewing at the property during the tour of inspection on the day of the meeting.

A Napa Rhyolite stone veneer in an Ashlar dry-stack lay will be installed on the base of the new front entry porch and columns, on the existing east chimney and installed as a stone wainscot on all four sides of the detached garage (Attachment 5, page 22). All existing aluminum windows are proposed to be replaced with new double-paned, unclad wood, simulated divided-light Marvin windows. The roof material will be a triple layer Presidential TL composition shingle roof in the “Aged Bark” color, (Attachment 5, sheet 21), or the GAF Glenwood series in “Weathered Wood” (Attachment 5, sheet A2.1). Both shingle products and colors are consistent with the Planning Commission’s policy requiring a triple layer composition shingle roof, compatible with the style of the residence.

A new 1’-6” tall stucco retaining wall will be installed along the north and west property lines and a new 6’ tall grapestake fence will be installed on top of the retaining wall. The new 9’-6” wide driveway, new patios, walkways, stairs and stepping stones will be composed of Cal-Stone pavers in the Cream-Tan-Brown color with an antiqued flat top finish in the Wild Pattern lay (Attachment 5, sheet 22). Staff finds that the proposed finish materials comply with the recommendations of the Residential Design Guidelines.

Site Coverage:  Per Municipal Code Section 17.10.030.C, site coverage shall be limited to a maximum of 22 percent of the base floor area allowed for the site.  In addition, if at least 50 percent of all site coverage on the property is composed of permeable or semi-permeable materials, an additional amount of site coverage of up to four percent of the site area may be allowed. 

Site Analysis: The project site is 4,000 square feet, thus, the total site coverage is limited to 556 square feet including the bonus amount of site coverage, since more than 50% of the driveway, walkways and patios are proposed to be permeable. The project is proposing 493 square feet of site coverage, in compliance with the Municipal Code’s requirements.

Lighting:  Municipal Code Section 15.36.070.B.1 states that all exterior lighting attached to the main building or any accessory building shall be no higher than 10 feet above the ground and shall not exceed 25 watts (incandescent equivalent; i.e., approximately 375 lumens) in power per fixture. Landscape lighting shall not exceed 18 inches above the ground nor more than 15 watts (incandescent equivalent; i.e., approximately 225 lumens) per fixture. Additionally, the City’s Residential Design Guidelines, Section 11.8, states an objective to “locate and shield fixtures to avoid glare and excess lighting as seen from neighboring properties and from the street. Use lights only where needed for safety and at outdoor activity areas. Lights should not be used to accent buildings or vegetation.”

The applicant is proposing 7 shielded, down-facing, incandescent wall light fixtures that will have a 25-watt bulb installed (Attachment 5, sheet A1.L).  The applicant is also proposing 5 shielded, down-facing landscape lights limited to 215 lumens in brightness and spaced 10’ apart. The number, locations, fixture type and brightness of the proposed fixtures complies with the requirements of the Municipal Code.