DS 24207 (Hermle-Collins): Consideration of a Final Design Study, DS 24207 (Hermle-Collins), associated Coastal Development Permit, and associated Lot Line Adjustment for the demolition of an existing 1,321-square-foot, one-story single-family residence and the construction of a 1,818-square-foot, two-story single-family residence, inclusive of a 246-square-foot attached garage at Mission Street 4 northeast of 1^st Avenue  in the Single-Family Residential (R-1) District, Archaeological Significance (AS) Overlay, and Very High Fire Severity Zone. APN: 010-112-012-000.

Proposed CEQA Action: Find the Project categorically exempt from environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15302 and 15303 and that none of the exceptions to the exemptions can be made in this case

The applicant is proposing to demolish three existing single-family residences on two 4,000-square-foot lot and one 6,000-square-foot lot and construct three new two-story single-family residences with associated site improvements. The projects also includes lot line adjustments to create a 4150-square-foot lot, a 4950-square-foot lot, and a 4900-square-foot lot. Parcel 010-112-012-000 and 010-112-007-000 were evaluated for historical significance and determined to not be eligible for the Carmel Historic Inventory.  Parcel 010-112-013-000 was not evaluated for historical significance because it was not 50 years old and did not qualify for evaluation.  The City Forester reviewed the trees on and around all three parcels.  All trees were found significant except for one in the right-of-way in front of parcel 010-112-013-000, which is proposed to be removed. 

Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following:

1)      A resolution (Attachment 1 – Lot Line Adjustment):

a.       Finding that the lot line adjustment is minor alteration in land use limitation which qualifies as Categorically Exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15305(a) and none of the exceptions pursuant to Section 15300.2 can be made; and

b.       Approving a lot line adjustment between three legal lots of record consisting of: one 4,000 square foot parcel (APN: 010-112-012-000), one 4,000 square foot parcel (APN: 010-112-013-000), and one 6,000 square foot parcel (010-112-007-000) resulting in one 4,150 square foot parcel (Hapuna), one 4,950 square foot parcel (Kailea), and one 4,900 square foot parcel (Ahana), respectively.

2)      A resolution (Attachment 2 – DS 24207 Hapuna):

a.       Finding that the demolition and rebuild of the single family dwelling is a replacement or reconstruction of an existing structure located on the same site and for the same purpose and capacity which qualifies as Categorically Exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15302 and 15303 and none of the exceptions pursuant to Section 15300.2 can be made;

b.       Approving a Coastal Development Permit to allow the demolition of a 1,064-square-foot single-family residence, a 257-square-foot carport and associated decking and the replacement of a two-story single-family residence; and

c.       Approving the Final Design Study to allow a rebuild resulting in an 1,818-square-foot, two-story single-family residence, inclusive of a 246-square-foot attached garage. The property is located on Mission Street 4 NE of First Avenue in the Single-Family Residential (R-1) District, APN: 010-112-012-000.

3)      A resolution (Attachment 3 – DS 24208/Kailea): 

a.       Finding that the demolition and rebuild of the single-family dwelling is a replacement or reconstruction of an existing structure located on the same site and for the same purpose and capacity which qualifies as Categorically Exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15302 and 15303 and none of the exceptions pursuant to Section 15300.2 can be made;

b.       Approving a Coastal Development Permit to allow the demolition of a 1,384-square-foot single-family residence, a 209-square-foot carport and associated decking and the replacement of a two-story single-family residence; and

c.       Approving the Final Design Study to allow a rebuild resulting in a 2,102-square-foot, two-story single-family residence, inclusive of a 250-square-foot detached garage. The property is located on Mission Street 3 NE of First Avenue in the Single-Family Residential (R-1) District, APN: 010-112-013-000. 

4)      A resolution (Attachment 4 – DA 24209/Ahana):

a.       Finding that the demolition and rebuild of the single-family dwelling is a replacement or reconstruction of an existing structure located on the same site and for the same purpose and capacity which qualifies as Categorically Exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15302 and 15303 and none of the exceptions pursuant to Section 15300.2 can be made;

b.       Approving a Coastal Development Permit to allow the demolition of a 1,091-square-foot single-family residence and 270-square-foot detached garage and the replacement of a two-story single-family residence; and

c.       Approving the Final Design Study to allow a rebuild resulting in a 2,116-square-foot, two-story single-family residence, inclusive of a 264-square-foot detached garage. The property is located at Mission Street 2 NE of First Avenue in the Single-Family Residential (R-1) District, APN: 010-112-007-000.

Hapuna (010-112-012-000): The 1,321-square-foot existing single-story home was constructed in 1935 as a 264-square-foot studio.  Through multiple additions and alterations, the house increased in size from 1935 – 1976.  The house is not associated with any important events or people as described in the Carmel Historic Context Statement, nor does it reflect an important architectural style as described in the Carmel Historic Context Statement.  On June 14, 2024, the Department of Community Planning and Building determined that the property on Mission 4 NE of 1st Avenue does not constitute a historic resource and is, therefore, ineligible for the Carmel Inventory of Historic Resources. 

The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing home and construct a new two-story single-family residence.  The new home will have the second story set back further from the right-of-way to work with the topography and avoid blocking neighboring properties views and access to light.  The applicant is proposing to build an 1,818-square-foot two-story single-family residence with stained wood windows, horizontal shiplap wood siding, and a varying width standing seam metal roof. A roof deck accessed through the primary suite is proposed on the single-story section of the main house in the middle of the parcel.  The applicant requests a lot line adjustment between the subject property and the adjacent parcel (APN 010-112-013-000) that would expand the subject parcel from 4,000-square-feet to 4150-square-feet in size.

At the time of writing this report, the city has received one letter of support for the proposed project from a Monterey County Resident living just outside town in the Carmel Woods neighborhood.  No previous opposition or supporters have reached out to staff regarding the projects at this time. 

Kailea (010-112-013-000): The 1,595-square-foot existing single-story home was constructed 1978.  The property was not old enough to be reviewed for historical significance because it is not yet 50 years old.  The existing property is a single-story with an attached carport at the northeast corner of the lot. 

The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing home and construct a new two-story single-family residence.  The new home is designed to follow the topography of the gentle slope it is situated upon. The second story has been sited at the rear of the property to reduce the appearance of bulk and mass from Mission Street.  The applicant proposes to build a 2,102-square-foot two-story single-family residence with an associated lot line adjustment that would expand the parcel from 4,000-square-feet to 4,950-square-feet.  The project will have natural weathered vertical wood board and batten siding and clear stained wood windows.  The roof material consists of a standing seam metal roof for the dormer and slate for the second story roof.  A drought resistant green roof is proposed on the front part of the main house in the middle of the parcel.  The applicant is proposing to construct a stone paver roof deck on the single-story section of the main house in the middle of the parcel.

At the time of writing this report, the city has received one letter of support for the proposed project from a Monterey County Resident living just outside town in the Carmel Woods neighborhood.  No previous opposition or supporters have reached out to staff regarding the projects at this time. 

Ahana (010-112-007-000): The 1,362-square-foot single-story residence was constructed in 1941 and has undergone few alterations.  On June 14, 2024, it was determined that the property does not constitute a historic resource and is, therefore, ineligible for the Carmel Inventory of Historic Resources.  It was determined to be ineligible because it is not associated with any important themes, events, people, architectural styles, or property types identified in Carmel’s Historic Context Statement. 

The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing home and garage to construct a new two-story single-family residence.  The new residence follows the topography of the site, stepping down the slope at the rear of the parcel. The applicant is proposing to build a 2,116-square-foot two-story single-family residence with an associated lot line adjustment that would reduce the parcel from 6,000-square-feet to 4,900-square-feet.  The project will have clear stained vertical wood batten siding and aluminum windows.  The roof material will consist of a gravel ballast.   A drought resistant green roof is proposed on the rear part of the main house.  The applicant is proposing to construct a stone paver roof deck on the two-story section of the main house at the rear of the parcel.

At the time of writing this report, the city has received one letter of support for the proposed project from a Monterey County Resident living just outside town in the Carmel Woods neighborhood.  No previous opposition or supporters have reached out to staff regarding the projects at this time. 

Previous Hearing: The following items were discussed at the October 9, 2024, and April 9, 2025, Planning Commission hearing. Appropriate conditions of approval of the Design Concept have been incorporated and implemented to address these concerns.

1.       Volume Study. The required Volumetric Study shall be successfully completed prior to scheduling for Final Details Review.

Staff Analysis:

(Hapuna) The required volume study was completed and the project has successfully passed.  The development is allowed 19,998 cubic feet of volume and as designed, is proposed at  13,273.25 cubic feet.

(Kailea) The required volume study was completed and the project has successfully passed. The development is allowed 22,671 cubic feet of volume and as designed, is proposed at 21,384.65 cubic feet. 

(Ahana) The required volume study was completed and the project has successfully passed. The development is allowed 23,505 cubic feet of volume and as designed, is proposed at 23,266.69 cubic feet.

2.       Reduce Opening (Hapuna). Prior to Final Details Review, the applicant shall reduce the size of the windows and doors at the entry of the subject site to a human scale to conform to the Carmel Residential Design Guidelines.

Staff Analysis (Hapuna): The applicant has reduced the size of the front window and door to address the condition of approval.  The front door has been reduced from 8’ to 6’-8” and reduced the height of the front windows by approximately 6 inches.  The proposed changes by the applicant meet the conditions set forth by the Planning Commission. 

Finish Details:

Hapuna: The applicant is proposing tight knot cedar, stained wood shiplap siding.  The siding will have 6 3/4” board faces with 3/4” gaps throughout.  The west and south elevations will also feature Carmel Stone cladding below the living room windows.  The doors are proposed to be paint-grade wood, and the windows will be tan stained wood.  The proposed roofing will be a synthetic slate with flat metal roofing for the overhangs.  The roofing at the rear of the property will be a vertical standing seam metal roof.  The decking for the second-story bedroom deck/balcony will use Ipe wood spaced boards with a black metal railing. 

Kailea: The applicant is proposing vertical grey, stained wood siding that appears like naturally weathered wood.  The siding will be 3 5/8” board and batten throughout.  The south elevations will also feature Carmel Stone cladding below the living room windows.  The doors are proposed to be clear stained grade Douglas Fir wood.  The proposed windows will be tan stained wood.  The proposed roofing will be a synthetic slate on the two-story element and a drought resistant green roof on the garage and one-story element of the residence.  The first-floor decking will be Ipe wood spaced boards.  The rooftop deck will be stone pavers.

Ahana: The applicant is proposing vertical clear-stained Port Orford Cedar wood siding that has the appearance of natural wood.  The siding will be board and batten with alternating 1 ½” battens and 3” boards throughout.  The exterior of the chimney will be board-formed architectural concrete.  The doors and windows will be clear, anodized coated aluminum (helping to protect the aluminum from scratches and weathering).  The proposed roofing will be gravel ballast and drought resistant green roofs.  The ground floor decking will be Ipe wood spaced boards and the roof deck will be stone pavers.  The proposed recessed hot tub at the rear of the property will be stainless steel. 

Fencing/Gate/Arbor:  

Hapuna: A new gate is being proposed on the north side of the site to create a trash enclosure.  A new 6’ tall wood picket fence is being proposed for the rear (east) property line and along the side (south) property line at the rear of the parcel to enclose the backyard. Carmel stone garden walls between 2’ and 2’-6” tall are proposed at the front of the property.  There are no other fences, gates, arbors, or walls being proposed.   

Kailea: A new fenced area with a gate is being proposed behind the detached garage to create a trash enclosure.  A new 6’ tall wood picket fence is being proposed for the rear property line and along the north and south property lines at the rear of the parcel to enclose the backyard.  There are no other fences, gates, arbors, or walls being proposed.

Ahana: A new fenced area with a gate is being proposed on the north side of the attached garage to create a trash enclosure.  A new 6’ tall wood picket fence is being proposed at the rear property line and along the north and south property lines at the rear of the property to enclose the backyard.  The fencing extends along the south property line to the west property line.  The fencing extends north along the west property line enclosing a portion of the front yard.  There are no other fences, gates, arbors, or walls being proposed.

Site Coverage: Land Use Plan (LUP) Policy P1-49 states that site coverage shall not exceed 45% and Carmel-by-the-Sea Municipal Code (CMC) Section 17.10.030.C (Site Coverage) limits impermeable site coverage to 22% of the base floor area allowed for the site. On a 4,000-square-foot lot, the allowed base floor area is 1,800 square feet, and the amount of site coverage permitted is 396 square feet. Impermeable materials include asphalt, concrete, mortared brick and stone, decomposed granite, unspaced decking and balconies at any level, garden walls, solariums, bridges, sheds not counted as floor areas, ponds, hot tubs, and swimming pools.

If at least 50 percent of the property's site coverage is made of permeable or semi-permeable materials, an additional amount of site coverage of up to four percent of the site area, 160 square feet, may be allowed for use in a single driveway of up to nine feet in width. Permeable and semi-permeable materials include gravel, spaced decking and exterior stairs, sand-set bricks or pavers, garden walkways of small paving stones, and arbors.

Staff Response:

Hapuna: The 4,150 square foot lot is allowed 574 square feet of site coverage if at least half of the coverage is semi- or fully permeable. The applicant proposes a total of 572 square feet of site coverage with over half being semi-permeable. Semi-permeable materials proposed include the stone paver driveway and walkway, and the wood deck. The project meets the requirements for site coverage.

Kailea: The 4,950 square foot lot is allowed 667 square feet of site coverage if at least half of the coverage is semi- or fully permeable. The applicant proposes a total of 567 square feet of site coverage with over half being semi-permeable. Semi-permeable materials proposed include the permeable wood paver driveway and walkway, stone paver walkway, and the wood deck. The project meets the requirements for site coverage

Ahana: The 4,900 square foot lot is allowed 662 square feet of site coverage if at least half of the coverage is semi- or fully permeable. The applicant proposes a total of 657 square feet of site coverage with over half being semi-permeable. Semi-permeable materials proposed include the permeable wood pave driveway and walkway, and the wood decks. The project meets the requirements for site coverage.

Right-of-Way Character: Both LUP Policy P1-43 and Section 1.5-1.7 of the Residential Design Guidelines encourages maintaining the forest character of the right-of-way by using natural materials for street parking, maintaining informal, natural vegetation, and maintaining trees.  Section 2.0 of the Residential Design Guideline’s objectives further encourage properties and development to maintain the meandering character of streets, the rustic street drainage, and to maintain the existing street widths.  Section 10.2-10.4 of the Residential Design Guidelines encourages the use of green, native plant species that continue the feel of the forest character of Carmel. 

Staff Response:

For Hapuna, the applicant is proposing to extend the stone paver tire paths driveway to the street edge and a mulch pathway in the right-of-way.  For Kailea, the applicant is proposing a wood paver driveway and a mulch pathway in the right-of-way.  For Ahana, the applicant is proposing a wood paver tire path driveway and a mulch pathway in the right-of-way.  The proposed landscaping in the front of all three properties and the right-of-way is a mix of ground cover (Dymondia and Yerba Buena) and small vegetation (sword fern and creeping sage).  All trees on Hapuna and Ahana are being retained, maintaining the forest feel of the lot from the street. One Monterey Pine in the right-of-way is being removed as part of the Kailea project because the tree was deemed not significant and was determined to be unhealthy.  The applicant is required to plant three upper canopy trees as part of the Kailea project and one at Hapuna to meet minimum tree density.  The proposed projects are consistent with LUP policy, design guidelines, and municipal code standards for the right-of-way. 

Skylights: No skylights are proposed for Hapuna and Kailea.  There is one skylight proposed at the rear of Ahana, which meets all guidelines as it is at the rear of the property and is not visible from the right-of-way or neighboring properties.

Chimney: Section 9.15 of the Residential Design Guidelines encourages chimneys that integrate into the building, are an appropriate size, and avoid blocking views. 

Staff Response:

Hapuna: The project does not include a chimney.  However, the floorplans include a gas insert fireplace with an exhaust vent instead of a chimney.

Kailea: The project has a gas fireplace with a small chimney that meets the standards for chimney height and size.  The chimney is only as large as is required by manufacturer specifications and does not create any view issues.  The lower section of the chimney connects to the ground as is encouraged by the design guidelines.  The lower part of the chimney is vineyard rock quarry stone and it follows the stonework recommendations of the design guidelines by terminating on interior edges and not being installed in a decorative, ornate manner.    

Ahana: The project has a gas fireplace with a small chimney that meets the standards for chimney height and size. The chimney is only as large as is required by manufacturer specifications and does not create any view issues.  The lower section of the chimney connects to the ground as is encouraged by the design guidelines.  The lower part of the chimney is board form architectural concrete and that fits with the architectural style of the building. 

Landscaping: Section 10.2-10.4 of the Residential Design Guidelines encourages the use of green, native plant species that continue the feel of the forest character of Carmel. 

Staff Response:

The landscaping for all three projects were designed together with the intention of retaining and accentuating the Coastal Oak and Monterey Pine trees that exist on the parcels.  The intention was to create the feel of the structures nestled into a grove of trees.  The landscaping includes native, drought resistant species that would be found in an oak/pine grove.  The projects were designed so that the landscaping blends together and flows between the parcels.  The applicant included native, drought resistant green roofs on Kailea and Ahana to help them fit and blend into the natural environment more cohesively.  The existing and proposed landscaping is being used to screen the structures from the street and the neighboring homes.

Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21080.a states that the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) applies to discretionary projects proposed to be carried out or approved by public agencies unless the project is found exempt. Pursuant to PRC Section 21084, the CEQA Guidelines provide a list of classes of projects (Sections 15300-15332) which have been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment and are therefore exempt from the provisions of CEQA.

Lot Line Adjustment

CEQA Guidelines Section 15305 – Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations, is a Class 5 exemption consists of minor alterations in land use limitations in areas with an average slope of less than 20%, which do not result in any changes in land use or density, including minor lot line adjustments. The proposed lot line adjustment is considered minor in nature as it does not change the rectangular configuration of the lots, the resulting lot sizes meet the minimum and maximum building site, and the general location of development does not change. At it’s current configuration, the Hapuna lot has an average slope of 7.47%, the Kailea lot has an average slope of 10.28%, and the Ahana lot has an average slope of 10.34%. The total average slope between the three properties is 9.36%. Individually and in total, the properties are below the 20% threshold. Therefore, staff recommends the Planning Commission find the lot line adjustment exempt from environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15305. Approval of the lot line adjustment does not trigger any of the exceptions to the exemptions listed in Section 15300.2 of the CEQA Guidelines.

Final Design and Coastal Development Permit

All three projects consist of the demolition and reconstruction of a single-family dwelling on properties zoned for residential use. Therefore, as a result of project implementation, there would be no change in baseline use. All three projects individually qualify for categorical exemptions pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15302 (Class 2) and 15303 (Class 3). The discussion below describes how each individual project qualifies for the exemptions listed and how no exceptions to the exemptions exists pursuant to Section 15300.2 of the CEQA Guidelines.  Staff has determined and the applicant has demonstrated that these are three separate projects with independent utility and even if they were required to be considered as parts of a single project they still fall under the Class 3 categorical exemption as CEQA Guidelines Section 15303(a) covers up to 3 single-family residences in urbanized areas.

(Hapuna): The project qualifies for a categorical exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15302 – Replacement or Reconstruction. This Class 2 exemption consists of the replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and facilities where the new structure will be located on the same site as the replaced structure and will have substantially the same purpose and capacity as the structure replaced. Although the examples listed under subsections “a” through “d” only include public/quasi-public, commercial and utility structures, the examples are not exhaustive and are not limiting.

The project also qualifies for a categorical exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15303 – New construction or conversion of small structures. This Class 3 exemption consists of construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures; installation of small new equipment and facilities in small structures; and the conversion of existing small structures from one use to another where only minor modifications are made in the exterior of the structure. Examples of this exemption include but are not limited to: one single-family residence or a second dwelling unit in a zone which permits residential uses. In urbanized areas, up to three single-family residences may be constructed or converted under this exemption.  The project consists of the demolition of an existing single-family residence and construction of a new single-family residence which meets this exemption.

None of the exceptions to exemptions listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply in this case. Class 3 projects are qualified by consideration of where the project is located. However, a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. The site is not known to contain or support environmental resources of hazardous or critical concern designated, precisely mapped and officially adopted pursuant to federal, state or local law. The subject property is located within an Archaeological Significance Overlay district. As such, a Phase I Archaeological Assessment was prepared (Achasta Archaeological Services, April 2005) and submitted as part of the application. The report concluded that the site experienced moderate to high ground disturbance and the results of the assessment were negative. The project would not result in a cumulative significant impact. During previous Design Concept hearings, staff received correspondence asserting that the construction of 3 adjacent single-family dwellings would result in impacts cumulatively considerable. Monterey Bay Air Resources District CEQA Air Quality Guidelines (updated February 2008) establishes thresholds of significance relative to construction impacts. Construction activities that generate 82 pounds per day or more of PM₁₀ (inhalable particulate matter with a diameter of 10 micrometer or less) would have a significant impact on local air quality. Earthmoving (grading/excavation) below 2.2 acres per day are assumed to be below the 82 pound per day threshold of significance. The project plans for the Hapuna project indicate the development would require 245 cubic yards of grading with a total site disturbance of 4,150 square feet, well below the threshold. The Hapuna, Kailea and Ahana developments are separate projects and have independent utility. For example, approval of one project is not dependent on approval of another. Therefore, they are not reasonably foreseeable consequences of each other. That said, the project plans for Kailea indicate that total site disturbance would be 4,915 square feet and the total site disturbance for Ahana would be 4,880 square feet. If each project were approved by the Planning Commission, all conditions of approval were complied with and construction permits were approved and issued at the same time; and if grading for all three projects occurred at the same time and over a one-day period, the total disturbance would be 13,945 square feet, or less than 1/3^rd of an acre. Although unlikely, and not reasonably foreseeable, this would be below the threshold of significance. The is no reasonable possibility that the project would have a significant effect on the environment due to an unusual circumstance. The project includes the demolition and rebuild of a single family dwelling which is a permitted use within the site’s designated residential zoning district. The project in itself is not an unusual development in the city. Further, due to the size of the city, it is not usual for construction projects to occur in proximity to other active projects. The proposed project does not request a variance and remains in context and consistent with the existing conditions in the neighborhood.  The project is consistent with all applicable General Plan policies, zoning requirements, and design guidelines. The project does not involve a site that results in damage to scenic resources within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway, a hazardous waste site, or designated historic resource (see Figure 1, the project sites are outlined in red and historic resources noted with gray striping).  

(Kailea): The project qualifies for a categorical exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15302 – Replacement or Reconstruction. This Class 2 exemption consists of the replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and facilities where the new structure will be located on the same site as the replaced structure and will have substantially the same purpose and capacity as the structure replaced. Although the examples listed under subsections “a” through “d” only include public/quasi-public, commercial and utility structures, the examples are not exhaustive and are not limiting.

The project also qualifies for a categorical exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15303 – New construction or conversion of small structures. This Class 3 exemption consists of construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures; installation of small new equipment and facilities in small structures; and the conversion of existing small structures from one use to another where only minor modifications are made in the exterior of the structure. Examples of this exemption include but are not limited to: one single-family residence or a second dwelling unit in a zone which permits residential uses. In urbanized areas, up to three single-family residences may be constructed or converted under this exemption.  The project consists of the demolition of an existing single-family residence and construction of a new single-family residence which meets this exemption.

None of the exceptions to exemptions listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply in this case. Class 3 projects are qualified by consideration of where the project is located. However, a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. The site is not known to contain or support environmental resources of hazardous or critical concern designated, precisely mapped and officially adopted pursuant to federal, state or local law. The subject property is located within an Archaeological Significance Overlay district. As such, a Phase I Archaeological Assessment was prepared (Achasta Archaeological Services, April 2005) and submitted as part of the application. The report concluded that the site experienced moderate to high ground disturbance and the results of the assessment were negative. The project would not result in a cumulative significant impact. During previous Design Concept hearings, staff received correspondence asserting that the construction of 3 adjacent single-family dwellings would result in impacts cumulatively considerable. Monterey Bay Air Resources District CEQA Air Quality Guidelines (updated February 2008) establishes thresholds of significance relative to construction impacts. Construction activities that generate 82 pounds per day or more of PM₁₀ (inhalable particulate matter with a diameter of 10 micrometer or less) would have a significant impact on local air quality. Earthmoving (grading/excavation) below 2.2 acres per day are assumed to be below the 82 pound per day threshold of significance. The project plans for the Kailea project indicate the development would require grading consisting of 270 cubic yards of cut and 65 cubic yards of fill, with a total site disturbance of 4,915 square feet, well below the threshold. The Hapuna, Kailea and Ahana developments are separate projects and have independent utility. For example, approval of one project is not dependent on approval of another. Therefore, they are not reasonably foreseeable consequences of each other. That said, the project plans for Hapuna indicate that total site disturbance would be 4,150 square feet and the total site disturbance for Ahana would be 4,880 square feet. If each project were approved by the Planning Commission, all conditions of approval were complied with and construction permits were approved and issued at the same time; and if grading for all three projects occurred at the same time and over a one-day period, the total disturbance would be 13,945 square feet, or less than 1/3^rd of an acre. Although unlikely, and not reasonably foreseeable, this would be below the threshold of significance. The is no reasonable possibility that the project would have a significant effect on the environment due to an unusual circumstance. The project includes the demolition and rebuild of a single-family dwelling which is a permitted use within the site’s designated residential zoning district. The project in itself is not an unusual development in the city. Further, due to the size of the city, it is not usual for construction projects to occur in proximity to other active projects. The proposed project does not request a variance and remains in context and consistent with the existing conditions in the neighborhood.  The project is consistent with all applicable General Plan policies, zoning requirements, and design guidelines. The project does not involve a site that results in damage to scenic resources within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway, a hazardous waste site, or designated historic resource (see Figure 1, the project sites are outlined in red and historic resources noted with gray striping). 

(Ahana): The project qualifies for a categorical exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15302 – Replacement or Reconstruction. This Class 2 exemption consists of the replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and facilities where the new structure will be located on the same site as the replaced structure and will have substantially the same purpose and capacity as the structure replaced. Although the examples listed under subsections “a” through “d” only include public/quasi-public, commercial and utility structures, the examples are not exhaustive and are not limiting.

The project also qualifies for a categorical exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15303 – New construction or conversion of small structures. This Class 3 exemption consists of construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures; installation of small new equipment and facilities in small structures; and the conversion of existing small structures from one use to another where only minor modifications are made in the exterior of the structure. Examples of this exemption include but are not limited to: one single-family residence or a second dwelling unit in a zone which permits residential uses. In urbanized areas, up to three single-family residences may be constructed or converted under this exemption.  The project consists of the demolition of an existing single-family residence and construction of a new single-family residence which meets this exemption.

None of the exceptions to exemptions listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply in this case. Class 3 projects are qualified by consideration of where the project is located. However, a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. The site is not known to contain or support environmental resources of hazardous or critical concern designated, precisely mapped and officially adopted pursuant to federal, state or local law. The subject property is located within an Archaeological Significance Overlay district. As such, a Phase I Archaeological Assessment was prepared (Achasta Archaeological Services, April 2025) and submitted as part of the application. The report concluded that the site experienced moderate to high ground disturbance and the results of the assessment were negative. The project would not result in a cumulative significant impact. During previous Design Concept hearings, staff received correspondence asserting that the construction of 3 adjacent single-family dwellings would result in impacts cumulatively considerable. Monterey Bay Air Resources District CEQA Air Quality Guidelines (updated February 2008) establishes thresholds of significance relative to construction impacts. Construction activities that generate 82 pounds per day or more of PM₁₀ (inhalable particulate matter with a diameter of 10 micrometer or less) would have a significant impact on local air quality. Earthmoving (grading/excavation) below 2.2 acres per day are assumed to be below the 82 pound per day threshold of significance. The project plans for the Ahana project indicate the development would require grading consisting of 200 cubic yards of cut and 30 cubic yards of fill with a total site disturbance of 4,880 square feet, well below the threshold. The Hapuna, Kailea and Ahana developments are separate projects and have independent utility. For example, approval of one project is not dependent on approval of another. Therefore, they are not reasonably foreseeable consequences of each other. That said, the project plans for Kailea indicate that total site disturbance would be 4,915 square feet and the total site disturbance for Hapuna would be 4,150 square feet. If each project were approved by the Planning Commission, all conditions of approval were complied with and construction permits were approved and issued at the same time; and if grading for all three projects occurred at the same time and over a one-day period, the total disturbance would be 13,945 square feet, or less than 1/3^rd of an acre. Although unlikely, and not reasonably foreseeable, this would be below the threshold of significance. The is no reasonable possibility that the project would have a significant effect on the environment due to an unusual circumstance. The project includes the demolition and rebuild of a single-family dwelling which is a permitted use within the site’s designated residential zoning district. The project in itself is not an unusual development in the city. Further, due to the size of the city, it is not usual for construction projects to occur in proximity to other active projects. The proposed project does not request a variance and remains in context and consistent with the existing conditions in the neighborhood.  The project is consistent with all applicable General Plan policies, zoning requirements, and design guidelines. The project does not involve a site that results in damage to scenic resources within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway, a hazardous waste site, or designated historic resource (see Figure 1, the project sites are outlined in red and historic resources noted with gray striping). 

 Figure 1. Site context (outlined in red) and locations of designated historic structures (gray hatch)