The Design Study application describes the project as a remodel and addition to an existing residence. The Carmel Municipal Code does not define a remodel but includes it in the definition of an alteration. Additions and demolitions are also included in the definition of an alteration. The Code further defines demolition as,
Demolition. The act of reconstructing, removing, taking down, or destroying all or portions of an existing building or structure, or making extensive repairs or modifications to an existing building or structure, if such changes involve removal or replacement of 50 percent or more of both the structural framing and cladding or of the exterior walls within a 24-month period. When determining whether a building or structure is demolished, the following applies:
A. The nonconforming portions of any wall are counted as removed or taken down, even when retention of these portions is proposed.
B. Any continuous run of remaining exterior wall surfaces measuring 10 feet or less in length are counted as removed or replaced.
Based on the demolition floor plan, more than 50 percent of the exterior walls will be removed to accommodate the additions. Some of the walls proposed to remain are 10 feet or less long and are counted as being demolished. Therefore, the project meets the definition of demolition.
Occasionally, applicants will retain portions of existing walls to preserve a setback nonconformity. The property has a nonconforming street side yard setback of 4’-9” where a minimum 5-foot setback is required.
Rather than shift the building wall 3” to the north, the applicant proposes to retain this section of the south elevation to preserve this non-conformity. In accordance with the definition of demolition, this wall is considered demolished even though it is proposed to be retained and is therefore included in the calculation for determining whether 50 percent or more of the exterior walls are being removed.
If this wall is identified for removal in the construction drawings (e.g., for structural reasons or otherwise) or subsequently removed by the contractor during construction, it is required to be rebuilt in conformance with the 5-foot street-side yard setback. All new construction (e.g., the additions) must meet the required setbacks.
The following is an analysis of the project’s consistency with the Residential Design Guidelines.
Forest Character: Residential Design Guidelines 1.1 through 1.4 encourage preserving significant trees and minimizing impacts on established trees, protecting the root systems of all trees to be preserved, and maintaining a forested image on the site.
Staff Response: The City Forester identified 12 trees on, or adjacent to, the project site during the preliminary site assessment, including one Monterey cypress, two Monterey pines, and nine Coast live oaks. All trees have been rated as significant.
On June 16, 2022, the applicant submitted a Tree Removal application TR 22-082 (Nute) to remove one Coast live oak tree (Tree No. 2) due to its close proximity to the residence, and on August 4, 2022, the City Forester approved the permit. The City Forester recommends that two new upper canopy trees be planted. The project meets the design objectives for forest character.
Privacy, Views, Light, & Air: Residential Design Guidelines 5.1 through 5.3 encourage designs that preserve reasonable privacy for adjacent properties; maintain view opportunities to natural features that lie outside the property; locate buildings so they will not substantially block views enjoyed by others; and, maintain views through a property to natural features when feasible.
General Plan Policy P1-51 states, Consider the effect of proposed residential construction on the privacy, solar access, and private views of neighbors when evaluating design review applications. Avoid designs that are insensitive to the designs of neighboring buildings. Attempt to achieve an equitable balance of these design amenities among all properties affected by design review decisions.
The Residential Design Guidelines implement General Plan Policy P1-51 by recommending that buildings are located so they will not substantially block views enjoyed by others [emphasis added]; that major building masses be located to maintain some views through the site from other properties [emphasis added]; and, the building mass is kept low in order to maintain views over the structure [emphasis added]. The Planning Commission is tasked with determining what an equitable balance is among properties and what constitutes a “substantial” view blockage.
Staff Response: Below are separate analyses on privacy, views, and access to light.
Privacy. The northern neighbor’s living spaces facing the project site include the kitchen and primary bedroom suite on the first floor and two bedrooms on the second floor. The applicant proposed three north-facing windows on the second-story addition, two in the staircase and one in a bathroom. All three windows are proposed to have privacy glass.
Views. After installing the story poles for the original concept design, it was discovered that the project would impact an existing water view from one of the upstairs bedrooms. Staff recommended that the project be modified to maintain this existing water view. The Commission agreed and passed a motion to continue the project with direction to the applicant to mitigate the view impact.
The revised concept design shifted the two-story building mass to the south and west to preserve a portion of the existing water view. The applicant provided a view diagram that compared the view field between the original design and the revised concept design. The changes resulted in a portion of the existing view being preserved. However, the northern neighbor did not see a measurable improvement and the Planning Commission agreed, continuing the project with direction to the applicant to develop a new design.
The applicable Residential Design Guideline objective is to balance and share view opportunities to natural features and landmarks. Guideline 5.2 says to maintain view opportunities to natural features that lie outside the property. Locate buildings so they will not substantially block views enjoyed by others. The question of what constitutes a substantial blockage of a view is entirely subjective and at the discretion of the Planning Commission.
On January 25, 2024, the applicant submitted a new design shifting the two-story building mass to the east side of the lot, closer to Carpenter Street to preserve the north neighbors existing water view.
Light. Solar access can be affected when a two-story residence is proposed along the south elevation of a neighboring property. To minimize impacts on natural light, the two-story portion of a residence should maintain low- to average plate heights, and the second floor should be set back from the ground floor to allow natural light to pass through to neighboring properties. A solar study can also provide additional information on the extent to which a neighbor’s natural light would be blocked at summer and winter solstice.
The original concept design placed the two-story building mass 3’-5” from the north property line with a 2’ eave depth. The interior plate heights were modest at 8’ on the first floor and 7’-6” on the second floor. The second floor was not set back from the ground floor, and the eave depth encroached into the side yard setback, limiting the northern neighbor’s access to natural light.
The revised concept design maintained the existing 6’ setback along the north side of the property, with the exception of a small projection on the first floor at bath 1 for a curbless shower. The proposed setback at this location was 3’-6”.While the second floor was not set back from the ground floor, the eave depth along the entire north elevation was reduced to 6” and no longer encroached into the side yard setback.
The applicant updated the solar study to reflect the shifting of the two-story building mass to the south and west, the associated increase in the side yard setback, and the reduced eave depth. Based on the solar study, these changes would have increased the northern neighbor’s exposure to sunlight at the first-floor windows compared to the original concept design. However, the northern neighbor did not see a measurable improvement and the Planning Commission agreed, continuing the project with direction to the applicant to develop a new design.
On January 25, 2024, the applicant submitted a new design shifting the two-story building mass to the east side of the lot which fronts on Carpenter Street to maximize access light in the northern neighbors kitchen and first floor primary suite.
Neither the General Plan, Residential Design Guidelines, nor the Municipal Code provides an objective standard by which to measure solar impacts. When evaluating solar studies, the Planning Commission should consider whether there is an equitable balance of access to natural light.
Parking and Access: Residential Design Guidelines 6.1 through 6.7 encourages subordinate parking facilities that do not dominate the design of the house or site; minimizing the amount of paved surface for a driveway; positioning garages to maximize open space, views and privacy; and, minimizing visual impacts.
Staff Response: The property contains a 252-square-foot detached single-car garage with a flat roof located within the rear yard with driveway access on 4th Avenue. The applicant is proposing to demolish the garage and construct a 219-square-foot detached garage within the same footprint. The existing driveway would remain.
The rear yard setback to the garage would increase from a nonconforming 2’-10” to a conforming 3’. The Carmel Municipal Code allows for structures to encroach into the rear 15-foot setback if the height of the structure is less than 15 feet The project meets the objectives of parking and access.
Mass and Bulk: Residential Design Guidelines 7.1 through 7.7 encourages a building’s mass to relate to the context of other homes nearby; minimize the mass of a building as seen from the public way or adjacent properties; and, relate to a human scale in its basic forms.
Staff Response: The existing 1,109-square-foot single-story residence is “L” shaped with a recessed front entry centrally located on the south (4th Avenue) elevation. The 252-square-foot detached garage is in the rear yard setback with driveway access on 4th Avenue. A bay window is located on the east end of the south elevation. A large brick firebox and chimney are located on the east (Carpenter Street) elevation.
The applicant is proposing a 1,578-square-foot two-story residence. Two-story residences are located to the north, south, and west. 517 square feet of existing floor area on the western half of the residence would be demolished and 525 square feet added to the east (front) portion of the lot along Carpenter Street. A 461-square-foot second-story addition would also be located on the eastern side of the lot. Shifting the building mass from the west side to the east side maintains the northern neighbor’s existing ocean view and preserves access to light and air at ground floor living spaces. Additionally, the second-story is set back from the first-floor.
CMC Section 17.10.030.D.3 (Exterior Volume) establishes a maximum allowed exterior volume by multiplying the base floor area by a volume factor of 10, 11, or 12. A volume study will be performed prior to the final details review. With the application of conditions, the project meets the objectives of mass and bulk.
Building and Roof Form: Residential Design Guidelines 8.1 through 8.5 encourages traditional building forms; using restraint with variations in building planes; using simple roof forms that are in proportion to the scale of the building; and, roof eave lines that are low in scale.
Staff Response: The applicant’s original design intent was to preserve the existing building foundation while adding on to the residence. As a result of the impacts to the northern neighbor, the applicant’s revised design includes demolishing the western half of the residence and expanding the home to the east with a new two-story addition. The existing 5:12 hipped roof would be replaced with a low sloping hipped roof with a gable accent roof in select locations. The project meets the objectives of building and roof form.