Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
3.0_Bowman Variance PA2011-099
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT July 21, 2011 Meeting Agenda Item 3 SUBJECT: Bowman Variance - (PA2011 -099) 403 Jasmine Avenue Variance No. VA2011 -008 APPLICANT: Brandon Architecture PLANNER: Jaime Murillo, Associate Planner (949) 644 -3209, jmurillo @newportbeachca.gov PROJECT SUMMARY Request for approval of a variance to allow the construction of a 6- foot -high deck and 42- inch -high guardrail (9- foot -6 -inch total height) that would encroach 5 feet into the required 5 -foot rear alley setback. The alley is unimproved and is not utlized for vehicular access. RECOMMENDATION 1) Conduct a public hearing; and 2) Adopt draft resolution approving Variance No. VA2011 -008, subject to findings and conditions (Attachment No. PC 1). Bowman Residence July 21, 2011 Page 2 VICINITY MAP GENERAL PLAN ZONING 1:74 ♦s R* V V > `♦ >4 a ♦. V >x.[ � W� x.r xr .i ttorf r.M LOCATION GENERAL PLAN ZONING CURRENT USE ON -SITE Two -Unit Residential (RT) Two -Unit Residential (R -2) Two -unit residential dwellings NORTH RT R -2 Two -unit residential dwellings SOUTH RT R -2 Single -unit residential dwelling EAST RT R -2 Two -unit residential dwellings WEST RT R -2 Two -unit residential dwellings Bowman Residence July 21, 2011 Page 3 INTRODUCTION Project Setting The subject property is located northwesterly of the intersection of Jasmine Avenue and Bayside Drive in Corona del Mar. The lot is rectangular in shape and 3,450 square feet in area. The lot slopes down in grade approximately 16 feet from the street elevation to the alley in the rear. Surrounding properties consist of single -unit and two -unit residential dwellings. The alley located at the rear of the subject property measures 14 feet in width and is currently unimproved (Attachment No. PC3 - Alley Photographs). The length of the alley from First Avenue to it terminus at the City park is approximately 215 feet and slopes down in grade approximately 16 feet. Though an alley dedication exists to the rear of the property, the dedication exists on paper only. The Public Works Department has no plans to improve the alley for vehicular access given its topography and the possibility of adversely affecting the City park in the Bayside Drive right -of -way. Improving the alley for vehicular access would involve modifying or relocating the playground area within the City park to allow the alley access to Bayside Drive. The residential properties abutting the alley take vehicular access from Iris Avenue and Jasmine Avenue. The City has no plans of vacating the alley because of the utilities that currently exist within the alley. A 6- inch -wide water line is located below grade and a 12- inch -wide wastewater (sewer) line is located above grade along the entire length of the alley to the limits of the City park, at which point both lines are located below grade. The City may also explore relocating a storm drain through alley in the future. Adjacent Encroachments The two, two -unit condominium buildings located across the alley at 400 and 402 Iris Avenue were granted a variance (VA 1160) in 1989 allowing the structures to exceed the height limit due to the topography of the lots. The VA 1160 also allowed the construction of 3- foot -high retaining walls and 6- foot -high fences (9- foot -high total height) that encroach 5 feet into the rear 5 -foot alley setback. The two -unit condominium building located to the north of the subject property at 405 Jasmine Avenue has been constructed with an approximately 4- foot -high retaining wall and 42- inch -high guardrail that encroaches 5 feet into the 5 -foot rear alley setback. A balcony on the second level also encroaches five feet into the setback. Staff has been unable to locate any associated permits, plans, or discretionary approvals for this encroachment and is currently investigating the construction (Attachment No. PC4 - Adjacent Encroachments Photograph). Bowman Residence July 21, 2011 Page 4 Project Description The applicant is currently constructing a four - level, two -unit residential condominium building on the subject site. The new condominium building will measure approximately 3,515 square feet in gross floor area. Since the alley is unimproved, vehicular access will be taken from Jasmine Avenue. The structure steps down in height with the natural topography of the site towards the alley (Attachment No. PC5 — Project Plans). As discussed in detail in the Zone Code Analysis section of this report, the project would conform to all the required zoning regulations of the R -2 Zoning District, with the exception of the requested encroachment. The applicant is proposing to encroach 5 feet into the 5 -foot rear alley setback with a 6- foot -high deck and 42- inch -high guardrail. The total combined height of the deck and guardrail would be 9 feet 6 inches (El. 103') as measured from the worst case natural grade (El. 93.5'). The deck has been designed to cantilever from the foundation of the residential structure and is supported by two posts. The design of the deck allows it to be easily removed in the future should the City decide to ever improve the alley, without affecting the foundation of the residential structure. Analysis General Plan The Land Use Element of the General Plan designates the property for Two - Family Residential (RT) uses. This designation applies to a range of two- family residential dwelling units such as duplexes and townhomes. The subject two -unit residential condominium building is consistent within this designation. Local Coastal Plan The subject property has a Coastal Land Use Plan designation of Two -Unit Residential (RT -D). The subject two -unit residential condominium building is consistent within this designation. Zoning Code Analysis The subject property is located within the Two -Unit Residential (R -2) Zoning District. The subject two -unit residential condominium building is a permitted use within the R -2 Zoning District. With the exception of the requested setback encroachment, all development regulations of the R -2 Zoning District would be met, including main building setbacks and structure height limitations. A building permit has been issued for the construction of the subject two -unit condominium building, with the exception of the requested encroachment. The following breakdown summarizes compliance with the required development standards: Bowman Residence July 21, 2011 Page 5 Development Standards Required Proposed Project Setbacks Front 15' 15' Side 3' 3' Rear (alley) 5' 5' to main structure 0' to deck (requires variance Maximum Height 24' Flat Roof /Deck 24' Flat Roofs /Deck Rails Rails 29' Sloped Roof 29' Sloped Roofs Maximum Floor Area 3,528 sq. ft. 3,515 sq. ft. Limit (Buildable Area x 1.5; 2,352 sf x 1.5 Parking 2 spaces per unit 2 spaces per unit Variance -Rear Setback Encroachment Pursuant to Section 20.30.110.D.1.c of the Zoning Code, no encroachments at the ground level are allowed within the required rear setback area of a lot abutting an alley. All alley setback areas shall be clear of obstructions. Therefore, the requested five -foot encroachment into the five -foot rear alley setback requires the approval of a variance. Pursuant to Section 20.52.090 of the Zoning Code, the Planning Commission must make the following findings in order to approve a variance: 1. There are special or unique circumstances or conditions applicable to the subject property (e.g., location, shape, size, surroundings, topography, or other physical features) that do not apply generally to other properties in the vicinity under an identical zoning classification; 2. Strict compliance with Zoning Code requirements would deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under an identical zoning classification; 3. Granting of the Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the applicant; 4. Granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and in the same zoning district; 5. Granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the harmonious and orderly growth of the City, or endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the public Bowman Residence July 21, 2011 Page 6 convenience, health, interest, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood, and 6. Granting of the Variance will not be in conflict with the intent and purpose of this Section, this Zoning Code, the General Plan, or any applicable specific plan. Staff believes sufficient facts exist to support the required findings and have included such facts in the attached draft resolution. The subject property, and other adjacent properties located along this unimproved alley, is unique in that the topography of the lot slopes down towards the unimproved alley. Typically, residential properties adjacent to 14- foot -wide alleys are required to maintain 5 -foot rear setbacks that are clear of any structures or obstructions in order to improve vehicular maneuverability through the alleys; however, in this case, the alley is unimproved and a clear 5 -foot setback is not necessary for this purpose. Given that this alley is not improved, and will likely never be improved for vehicular access, the property owner is deprived of the privilege of using the rear setback area as outdoor living space similar to other residential properties that do not abut an alley. Properties zoned R -1 and R -2 that are not located adjacent to an alley are typically required to maintain 10 -foot rear setbacks, but are permitted to construct fences, walls, and other accessory structures up to a height of 6 feet within this setback to provide a private and protected outdoor living area. The topography of the lot also limits the usability of rear of the lot for outdoor living space. Due to the topography of the lot, the height of the deck and guardrail is required to maintain the same elevation as the lowest level of the house and to create a usable outdoor living area that nearby properties on flat lots are able to enjoy. The encroachment into the rear alley setback will not be detrimental or constitute a hazard to persons residing in the neighborhood because the deck has been designed so it can be removed with minimal alteration to the residential structure should the City ever decide to improve the alley. The deck is cantilevered with only two posts supporting the deck, minimizing the massing of the encroachment as viewed by the neighboring residences. The guardrails are the minimum height necessary for safety and are designed to be of open construction, and will not obstruct light and air to adjoining properties, nor adversely impact views from adjacent residential properties. Therefore, staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Variance No. VA2011 -008 based on the discussion and facts above and the recommended conditions of approval that have been incorporated into the attached Draft Resolution for Approval (Attachment No. PC1). Alternatives Should the Planning Commission find the facts do not support the findings required to grant approval of the Variance, the Planning Commission should adopt the draft resolution, included as Attachment No. PC 2, denying Variance No. VA2011 -008. Bowman Residence July 21, 2011 Page 7 Environmental Review If the project is approved, the project is categorically exempt under Section 15303 of the Califorr a Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines - Class 3 (New Construction;. This exemption allows for the construction of apartments, duplexes. and similar structures designed for no more than six dwelling units. The subject dec- is accessory ;o the two -unit residential condominium structure currently under construction. If denied, projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves are not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA ") review, pursuant to Section 15270 of the CEQA Guidelines. Public Notice Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot. mailed to property owners wit' it 300 feet of the property and posted at the site a minimum of 10 days in advance of this hearing consistent with the Municipal Code. Additionally, the item appeared upon he agenda for this meeting. which was posted at City Hall and on the city website. Prepared by: Jaime Murillo, Associate Planner Submitted by: Gregg Ra i ez, Senior Planner ATTACHMENTS PC 1 Draft Resolution for Approval with Findings and Conditions PC 2 Draft Resolution for Denial PC 3 Alley Photographs PC 4 Adjacent Encroachments Photograph PC 5 Project Plans F \USERSPLN1Sharea�PAsPAs - 2011 WA2011 -099`•VA2011 -008 Krpi.do= Tmpit: 0622111 Attachment No. PC 1 Draft Resolution for Approval with Findings and Conditions RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH APPROVING VARIANCE NO. VA2011 -008 TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 6 -FOOT- HIGH DECK AND 42- INCH -HIGH GUARDRAIL THAT WOULD ENCROACH 5 FEET INTO THE REQUIRED 5 -FOOT REAR ALLEY SETBACK AT 403 JASMINE AVENUE (PA2011 -099) THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS. 1. An application was filed by Christopher Brandon, AIA, with respect to the property located at 403 Jasmine Avenue, and legally described as Lot 3, Block 336, of Corona del Mar Tract, requesting approval of a variance. 2. The applicant proposes a variance to allow the construction of a 6- foot -high deck and 42- inch -high guardrail (9- foot -6 -inch total height) that would encroach 5 feet into the required 5 -foot rear alley setback. The alley is unimproved and is not utlized for vehicular access. 3. The subject property is located within the Two -Unit Residential (R -2) Zoning District and the General Plan Land Use Element category is Two -Unit Residential (RT). 4. The subject property is located within the coastal zone and is designated Two -Unit Residential (RT -D) by the Coastal Land Use Plan. 5. A public hearing was held on July 21, 2011, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the meeting was given in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this meeting. SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION. The project is categorically exempt under Section 15301, of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines - Class 3 (New Construction). This exemption allows for the construction of apartments, duplexes, and similar structures designed for no more than six dwelling units. The subject deck is accessory to the two -unit residential condominium structure currently under construction. SECTION 3. REQUIRED FINDINGS. In accordance with Section 20.52.090.F of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, the following findings and facts in support of such findings are set forth: Planning Commission Resolution No. _ Paqe 2 of 6 Finding: A. That there are special or unique circumstances or conditions applicable to the subject property (e.g. location, shape, size, surrounding, topography, or other physical features) that do not apply generally to other properties in the vicinity under an identical zoning classification. Facts in Support of Finding: A -1. The subject property, as well as the other adjacent properties located along this unimproved alley, slopes down towards the unimproved alley. A -2. Residential properties adjacent to 14- foot -wide alleys are required to maintain 5 -foot rear setbacks that are clear of any structures or obstructions in order to improve the maneuverability through the alleys; however, in this case, the alley is unimproved and a clear 5 -foot setback is not necessary for this purpose. A -3. The topography of the lot limits the usability of rear of the lot for outdoor living space. Finding: B. That strict compliance with Zoning Code requirements would deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under an identical zoning classification. Facts in Support of Finding: B -1. Properties zoned R -1 and R -2 that are located adjacent to 14- foot -wide alleys are required to provide 5 -foot setbacks, which must be clear of any obstructions, including fences and decks, to allow for increased vehicular maneuverability through the alleys. B -2. Given that this alley is not improved, and will not likely be improved, the property is deprived of the privilege of using the setback area as outdoor living space. Finding: C. That the granting of the Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the applicant. Facts in Support of Finding: C -1. Since the alley is unimproved and there is no need to maintain a clear 5 -foot setback to the alley for vehicular maneuverability, the granting of the variance will allow the applicant the ability to utilize the area within the setback for outdoor living space. Tmplt: 04/14/10 Planning Commission Resolution No. _ Paqe 3 of 6 C -2. Due to the topography of the lot, the height of the deck and guardrail is required to maintain the same elevation as the lowest level of the house and to create a usable outdoor living area that nearby properties on flat lots are able to enjoy. Finding: D. That the granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and in the same zoning district. Facts in Support of Finding: D -1. The granting of the Variance allows the property owner to maintain parity with the usable outdoor space enjoyed by residential properties not regulated by a rear alley setback limitations or topography. D -2. Properties zoned R -1 and R -2 that are not located adjacent to an alley are typically required to maintain 10 -foot rear setbacks, but are permitted to construct fences, walls, and other accessory structures up to a height of 6 feet within this setback to provide a private and protected outdoor living area. D -3. In this case, the property abuts an unimproved alley that does not warrant the requirement that the setback be clear of any encroachments or obstructions. E. That the granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the harmonious and orderly growth of the City, or endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the public convenience, health, interest, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood. Facts in Support of Finding: E -1. The deck has been designed to facilitate removal in the future should the City ever decide to improve the alley. E -2. The deck is cantilevered with only two posts supporting the deck, minimizing the massing of the encroachment as viewed by the neighboring residences. E -2. The guardrails are the minimum necessary height for safety and are designed to be of open construction, and will not obstruct light and air to adjoining properties, nor adversely impact views from adjacent residential properties. F. Granting of the Variance will not be in conflict with the intent and purpose of this Section, this Zoning Code, the General Plan, or any applicable specific plan. Tmplt: 04/14/10 Planning Commission Resolution No. _ Page4of6 Facts in Support of Finding: F -1. The Land Use Element of the General Plan designates the subject property Two -Unit Residential (RT). The RT land use designation is intended to provide for a range of two- family residential dwelling units such as duplexes and townhomes. The subject two -unit residential condominium building is consistent within this designation. F -2. The subject property is located within the Two -Unit Residential (R -2) Zoning District. The subject two -unit residential condominium building is a permitted use within the R -2 Zoning District. F -3. The subject property is not located within a specific plan area. F -4. The granting of the Variance would allow the construction of an accessory structure to a two -unit residential condominium building that is consistent with the RT land use designation and R -2 Zoning District. SECTION 4. DECISION. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby approves Variance No. VA2011 -008, subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference. 2. This action shall become final and effective fourteen days after the adoption of this Resolution unless within such time an appeal is filed with the City Clerk in accordance with the provisions of Title 20 Planning and Zoning, of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 21st DAY OF JULY, 2011. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: BY: Charles Unsworth, Chairman BY: Bradley Hillgren, Secretary Tmplt: 04/14/10 Planning Commission Resolution No. _ Paqe 5 of 6 EXHIBIT "A" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (Project- specific conditions are in italics) PLANNING 1. The development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved site plan, floor plans and building elevations stamped and dated with the date of this approval. (Except as modified by applicable conditions of approval.) 2. Variance No. VA2011 -008 shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.54.060 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, unless an extension is otherwise granted. 3. The maximum height of the deck shall not exceed 6 feet in height and the guardrail shall not exceed 42 inches in height. The guardrail shall be constructed of open grillwork, wrought iron, latticework, Plexiglass, or similar materials. 4. The project is subject to all applicable City ordinances, policies, and standards, unless specifically waived or modified by the conditions of approval. 5. The applicant shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws. Material violation of any of those laws in connection with the use may be cause for revocation of this Use Permit. 6. This approval was based on the particulars of the individual case and does not in and of itself or in combination with other approvals in the vicinity or Citywide constitute a precedent for future approvals or decisions. 7. This Variance may be modified or revoked by the City Council or Planning Commission should they determine that the proposed uses or conditions under which it is being operated or maintained is detrimental to the public health, welfare or materially injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity or if the property is operated or maintained so as to constitute a public nuisance. 8. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall pay any unpaid administrative costs associated with the processing of this application to the Planning Department. 9. To the fullest extent permitted by law, applicant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, its City Council, its boards and commissions, officials, officers, employees, and agents from and against any and all claims, demands, obligations, damages, actions, causes of action, suits, losses, judgments, fines, penalties, liabilities, costs and expenses (including without limitation, attorney's fees, disbursements and court costs) of every kind and nature whatsoever which may arise from or in any manner relate (directly Tmplt: 04/14/10 Planning Commission Resolution No. _ Paqe 6 of 6 or indirectly) to City's approval of the Bowman Residence including, but not limited to, the Variance No. VA2011 -008. This indemnification shall include, but not be limited to, damages awarded against the City, if any, costs of suit, attorneys' fees, and other expenses incurred in connection with such claim, action, causes of action, suit or proceeding whether incurred by applicant, City, and /or the parties initiating or bringing such proceeding. The applicant shall indemnify the City for all of City's costs, attorneys' fees, and damages which City incurs in enforcing the indemnification provisions set forth in this condition. The applicant shall pay to the City upon demand any amount owed to the City pursuant to the indemnification requirements prescribed in this condition. 10. The applicant is required to obtain all applicable permits from the Building Division of the Community Development Department. The construction plans must comply with the most recent, City- adopted version of the California Building Code. Public Works 11. In the event that the alley is improved in the future, the property owner may be required, at their own expense, to remove the deck and guardrail encroachment within the rear 5- foot alley setback to accommodate the improvement. Tmplt: 04/14/10 Attachment No. PC 2 Draft Resolution for Denial RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DENYING VARIANCE NO. VA2011- 008 TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 6- FOOT -HIGH DECK AND 42- INCH -HIGH GUARDRAIL THAT WOULD ENCROACH 5 FEET INTO THE REQUIRED 5 -FOOT REAR ALLEY SETBACK AT 403 JASMINE AVENUE (PA2011 -099) THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS. 1. An application was filed by Christopher Brandon, AIA, with respect to the property located at 403 Jasmine Avenue, and legally described as Lot 3, Block 336, of Corona del Mar Tract, requesting approval of a variance. 2. The applicant proposes a variance to allow the construction of a 6- foot -high deck and 42- inch -high guardrail (9- foot -6 -inch total height) that would encroach 5 feet into the required 5 -foot rear alley setback. The alley is unimproved and is not utlized for vehicular access. 3. The subject property is located within the Two -Unit Residential (R -2) Zoning District and the General Plan Land Use Element category is Two -Unit Residential (RT). 4. The subject property is located within the coastal zone and is designated Two -Unit Residential (RT -D) by the Coastal Land Use Plan. 5. A public hearing was held on July 21, 2011, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the meeting was given in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this meeting. SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION. Pursuant to Section 15270 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves are not subject to CEQA review. SECTION 3. REQUIRED FINDINGS. Pursuant to Section 20.30.110.D.1.c of the Zoning Code, no encroachments at the ground level are allowed within the required rear setback area of a lot abutting an alley. All alley setback areas shall be clear of obstructions. Therefore, the requested 5 -foot encroachment into the 5 -foot rear alley setback requires the approval of a variance. The Planning Commission may approve a variance only after making each of the six required findings set Planning Commission Resolution No. _ Paqe 2 of 2 forth in Section 20.52.090.F. In this case, the Planning Commission was unable to make the required findings based upon the following: 1. There are no special or unique circumstances or conditions applicable to the subject property that generally does not apply to other properties zoned R -1 and R -2 in the vicinity. Several other properties are located along the unimproved alley and are subject to the same encroachment restrictions within the rear alley setback and subject to topographical constraints. 2. The strict compliance with Zoning Code requirements would not deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights because the design of the two -unit residential condominium could be altered to include a Code - compliant lower level patio. 3. The granting of the Variance would constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity because it would allow the subject property the ability to expand their usable outdoor living space into the rear setback area where other properties located along alleys are required to maintain the 5 -foot setback. SECTION 4. DECISION. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby denies Variance No. VA2011 -008. 2. This action shall become final and effective fourteen days after the adoption of this Resolution unless within such time an appeal is filed with the City Clerk in accordance with the provisions of Title 20 Planning and Zoning, of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 21st DAY OF JULY, 2011. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: MIN Charles Unsworth, Chairman BY: Bradley Hillgren, Secretary Tmplt: 04/14/10 Attachment No. PC 3 Alley Photographs View of alley from First Avenue View of alley First Avenue (close -up) View of alley from City park Attachment No. PC 4 Adjacent Encroachments Photograph Left- Retaining Wall Encroachments (400 and 402 Iris Avenue) M1 M,-iiiii�f Attachment No. PC 5 Project Plans � III I I 4 I o�,ROOR � I I wig ` Qe j gym. oIR»o I i ,i i I -T -T-1 1-f ' I `'- �, VARIANCE REQUEST w.W o I J_ L I auuees I II I I rA4 I I umv I I I I ! '-- varcmR . wrcrsx � — ® EAR ITEMT 41 SITE PLAN f GREENWME ALN ES a xu ur a1rwa va nav vaarter a[anxx ° wi nr gawr [wutlue',isn 111 Na raueuxcmr npa v+ se a — _'l -E2 . �mmnur � raw v im e ac a ea n awrwrvmy.sq yo ¢rnenawa�� mL'Jrofmaircxmmio m.ra imrawrrnu ° rv�i��Mw�va uxxnwii mnwamm ' _ ' 'I W J z Q w z m Yy d b 3 � ca lLu L v U W QF� O 0 J m N o 2Q'g F— U L 'I W J z Q w z m Yy d b 3 � ca lLu L v U W QF� O 0 J m N o 2Q'g F— U -- - - - - - - - - - __ - - - - - �� REQUEST u50lITX SITE WALL ELEVATION !Sl NORLH SITE WALL ELEVATION REQUEST I u c s QY �M1nS Oy" -52i ?$ ]§RB Q W W 091 myo xxg F- U A -2 �J 1 i vu �-E RL(N IFCT m . w ®o__ z m _ %\ ha+�vn�uowsn ErorxEOrsruolro.slM.uu¢ —. u g QY RR Z ani5 04 -41 z# 3jjB a$ LOWER LEVEL-REAR UNR FIRST FLR Lry -+u Q W w L v U \ W 7 a 0 1 co .aoow,e W W N 1. _ 2 G g FERE j'�] MAIN LEVEL- FRONT UNIT FIRST FLOOR y �h _ p +a �+ 'p' 1+ _ _ _ 9;� ii'#�1 ---- --- ---- -- 1g's�1 NEI EC .a ® ® R NO E� Fi��iid9i �j 369tl .3 ® oouEE0,u +C ,., ar�� t M wnu[ -� w�uwuOxre. OLER rORTERS IJ. oa O r i=t s MBE E . MO.EVH+w.srMren REERE - - - - ETINEsEC, ® av SECANO LEVEL FLOOR PLAN UGT cROCRE avERENCEE,rcmiu.µAxs a -3 PIAN LEGEND - - - - ETINEsEC, ® av SECANO LEVEL FLOOR PLAN UGT cROCRE avERENCEE,rcmiu.µAxs a -3 PIAN LEGEND a r �J el - - - -- - o P p al L �0 °I GN � mom n ro _, 'I L1 I � q o- I� '4 ' � uTHIRD LEVEL FLODft PLAN s 0 g �� � uROO FPLAN I c s QY mn�5 z- Og ?s Zd 3 ;�B cQ ILU L v U W co N O O F— U y V r mrznceuxcesc. onsauo+ne+oo-i ®�� zqy, rwT xrP RTITI xo L111— S iumn O o ww - os ®+eon utn�x[iuxmcwnu- a.�. :.a:�ruw.. � ® munsouwwu, -o uu uxo F i.rr- v- iL—CA— crvA.�ow� --- wvmESExrnmxwvwseew�v w.wE-- Eneneaa "PPL -- PL LEGEND v ® v Y Y o ra Y �■I{ lam®® ice^'+... � .. � � � -- �� ®i 1111111IIIII VIII 111111 �IIIIII moll ��© _II inuiutnmuu J� Will All .. ° ®- 0 m ° 2.2.. I� gg N F ROM LE J ��.� rI � u a o • - Im Illlllllllllllllllll llllllll111 - } =- o' REQUEST �. v ® o v a rrla�� - :Irrrrri�l a Wl �. Ll m. ® ` �Ih - _ ©i- �� 1 h,I ��_ == ° SESECTION . m7m WIN X91 II" . ; �I1961 li c II � i�l �_ . I� -.�-�- - Illilllllllllllllllillllllllll� 'IN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . d O D O O ®` EZ u 121 n 1 m °� IIIIIIIIWIIIIIIIII�III�IIIIIIII 0 I c s U 3 a. of ?°s2i ?€ ] §�B aW mum REQUEST 0 9 1 usIOE YARD SECT ION m o xLg F- U TRANSVERSE SECTION u w=�u TRANSVERSE SECTION u.w =vv TRANSVERSESECTICN I A -8 u iw -iv