HomeMy WebLinkAboutDodd Residence (PA2003-072)CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item No. 2
August 7, 2003
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: William Cunningham, Contract Planner
(949) 644 -3200
SUBJECT: Dodd Residence (PA2003 -072)
254 Poppy Avenue
APPLICANT NAME: Larry and Jackie Dodd
INTRODUCTION:
The applicant proposes to remodel an existing single - family residence located in
Corona del Mar by adding a second floor and roof deck. The remodel will result in an
increase in the height of the dwelling. The property is located within the 24/28 height
limitation zone and is on a sloping lot. The proposed building design exceeds 24 feet
and the applicant, pursuant to Section 20.65.030.8.3, requests to establish the natural
grade at the existing finished floor of the main living level of the existing residence.
Hold a public hearing and deny the applicants request by adopting the findings
contained in Exhibit No. 1.
DISCUSSION:
The existing residence is a single story structure that is built over a garage. The lot has
frontages on both Poppy Avenue and Hazel Drive. The street elevation at Poppy
Avenue is approximately 114 feet, and along Hazel Drive is approximately 100 feet, a
drop of approximately 14 feet between the streets. Similar to many of the homes along
Poppy Avenue in the vicinity of the subject property, the garage access is from Hazel
Drive with the garage cut into the hillside and the main house built over the garage. The
finish floor elevation of the existing residence is one foot below the street level of Poppy
Avenue, and the finish floor elevation of the garage is at approximately 1 foot above
Hazel Drive. The lot also has a detached studio located to the front (Poppy Avenue) of
the main house, approximately one foot from the front property line and approximately 6
inches from the south property line. Therefore, the property is non - conforming with
respect to the studio in that the front property setback is 10 feet and the side setbacks
are 3 feet. The main structure maintains the minimum required setbacks:
approximately 23 feet from the front property line, 3 feet on each side, and 4.5 feet
along Hazel Drive.
Dodd Residence
August 7, 2003
Page 2
The proposed addition will maintain the minimum required setbacks (see summary
below), and will increase the existing 1,553 square foot residence by adding 50 square
feet to the first floor, and a new 1,419 square -foot second floor. A new elevator /stairway
will be added from the garage level and a storage room and hallway added at that level,
resulting in an additional 239 square feet in the garage level. The total increase in floor
area will be 2,393 square feet, resulting in a total floor area (including garage) of 3,946
square feet.
Analysis
The project complies with other applicable site development standards of the Zoning Code
as summarized in the following table (the issues of building height, associated with the
establishment of grade, are discussed separately below):
Dodd Residence
August 7, 2003
Page 3
* Indicates existing legal non - conforming status of the detached studio
Measurement of Height
Section 20.65.030.A of the Zoning Code requires height to be measured from the highest
point of a structure and the grade directly below; in the case of sloped roofs, the height is
measured to the midpoint of the roof, with no portion of the roof extending more than five
feet above the permitted height. As shown on the applicants plans, the remodeled
structure exceeds the height limit when measured against the existing grade, with the roof
midpoint extending up to approximately 31+ feet above the existing grade (24 feet
maximum permitted).
Section 20.65.030.6.1 states that "the Planning Department shall exercise its best efforts
to determine the location of grade for the purpose of measuring height" and "shall use
existing on -site elevations and contours, as well as the elevations and contours of
adjoining and nearby properties to determine the natural profile of the site." That Section
goes on to state that "under no circumstances shall height be measured from excavated
surfaces such as basements... which have been used to artificially lower the ground
surface." As noted above, the site has been altered, and a garage excavated into the
hillside. However, field observations of the site indicate that the existing grades in the
sideyard of the property and within the sideyards of the adjacent properties to the north
and south are evident, and it is staffs opinion that those grades represent the natural
grades.
Establishment of Grade
Code Section 20.65.030.13.3 provides that the Planning Commission may establish a
grade for the purposes of measuring building height if the natural grade is "Inappropriate or
unworkable for the purpose of measuring height." Under the provisions of that section, the
following findings are required:
a. That the proposed grade being requested by the applicant is reasonable and
comparable with the grades of surrounding properties and that the establishment of
such grade will not be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and
general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood or be
detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the
general welfare of the City.
Dodd Residence
August 7, 2003
Page 4
As noted above, the applicant desires to establish grade as the finish floor level of the
existing residence from Poppy Avenue to Hazel Drive. However, in accordance with the
foregoing finding, it is necessary to compare the grade with surrounding properties. The
topographic map prepared and submitted by the applicant shows the ground elevations for
the adjacent properties to the north and south. Field investigations by staff support the
data on the topographic survey and indicates that the ground levels between the subject
property and the parcels to the north and south reflect near natural conditions. The
finished grade at the northeast corner of the existing house is approximately 100 feet; the
applicant is requesting to establish grade at approximately 112 feet. The grade at the
southeast corner is not as discemable due to the existing retaining wall; however, the
grade on the adjacent property to the south is approximately 107.5 feet, and the applicant
proposes to establish the grade at 112 feet. Based on the data provided on the
topographical survey, staff prepared an exhibit showing the grades along the north and
south property lines as well as the resultant height limits (refer to Exhibit No. 2). In staffs
opinion, those grades represent the natural grades from which building height is
measured. Therefore, the finding cannot be made based on that data. As shown on the
exhibit, the proposed addition exceeds the height limits based on the adjacent property
natural grades.
Staff surveyed the neighborhood and noted that the homes located at 214, 222, 230, 242,
248 and 250 Poppy Avenue have undergone remodel and /or reconstruction. Many of
those remodels are similar to the proposed project at 254 Poppy Avenue in that a second
story was added to an existing single story structure that is over an excavated garage. In
the case of 214, 242 and 250 Poppy, the reconstruction was approved prior to adoption of
the 24/28 height limitation regulations, at which time the height limit was at 35 feet. The
dwelling at 230 Poppy Avenue has been demolished and a new structure is currently
under construction. The approved plans for that property indicate that a topographical
survey was completed and the natural grade documented. According to the information
within the survey, the property maintained a level pad area to approximately eight feet
from the Hazel Drive property line, at which point the lot slopes down approximately 10
feet to the level of Hazel Drive. That property will have a garage with level access from
Hazel Drive, with two stories above the garage. However, mid -point of the roof is located
over the area of natural grade before it begins to slope to Hazel Drive, and the height to
midpoint does not exceed the 24 -foot height limit.
In researching the other properties along Poppy Avenue, staff was able to locate only two
other properties for which an establishment of grade was processed: 216 Poppy Avenue,
and 222 Poppy Avenue. 216 Poppy Avenue (Establishment of Grade No. 9) was
approved by the Planning Commission on February 7, 1991. The grade established for
that property had a level pad from Poppy Avenue to a distance of approximately 10 feet
from the Hazel Drive property line, at which point the grade made a 1:1 slope to the Hazel
Drive property line. With respect to 222 Poppy Avenue (Establishment of Grade No. 11,
approved by the Planning Commission on March 7, 1991), the established grade is similar
to 216, but the slope was determined to be approximately 15 feet from the Hazel Drive
property line, and made a 1.5:1 slope. The subject property appears to be different than
Dodd Residence
August 7, 2003
Page 5
than the properties located at 216 and 222 in that the latter properties appear to have a
natural grade with a flat building pad to a bluff near Hazel Drive, at which point there was a
sharp drop to the level of the street. The subject property, however, based on existing
sideyard grades and observed conditions on the properties to the north and south,
appears to have a uniform slope from Poppy Avenue to Hazel Drive, although a retaining
wall has since been constructed to the north of the existing residence, making it difficult to
determine with certainty the natural grade along the north property line.
In summary, while other properties along Poppy Avenue have been developed in a
manner similar to that proposed by the applicant, they were done so under the prior 35-
foot height standard, or the natural grade was demonstrated to be such that would permit
the heights proposed. This property is subject to fewer constraints to development in that
the natural grade appears to be a constant slope from Poppy Avenue, rather than a level
pad to a point to within ten to fifteen feet from Hazel Drive. Therefore, it is staff's opinion
that finding "a" cannot be made. .
b. That the proposed grade and related development will not result in the loss of any
public views and shall be consistent with the exiting character of the neighborhood
The neighborhood is totally built -out, and as noted above, many of the lots in the vicinity of
the subject property have been remodeled in recent years to add a second floor over an
excavated garage, and in some of the cases, roof decks. The proposed project will result
in a dwelling that is similar in height and design to other residences located along Poppy
Avenue and will not result in the loss of public views. A redesigned project using existing
grades as suggested by staff would allow a similar addition, although positioned further
away from Hazel Drive. The proposed project with the establishment of grade would block
no more views than an addition designed using natural grade as identified by staff.
Therefore, in staff's opinion, this finding can be made.
C, That the existing grade on the subject property is inappropriate and unworkable for
the purpose of measuring height.
In staffs opinion, the applicant has not demonstrated that using natural grade is
inappropriate or unworkable. As noted above, staff prepared an exhibit showing natural
grades based on grade elevations of properties to the north and south. As shown on
Exhibit No. 2, the existing natural grade would limit the applicant's ability to construct a two
story structure over the existing dwelling, particularly over the existing garage portion of
the structure, and would not allow the plans as submitted. The property is also somewhat
limited in that the existing detached studio at the front would limit construction. However,
staff notes that if the non - conforming studio were to be demolished, the main structure
could be located approximately 13 feet closer to Poppy Avenue, and the existing natural
grade would allow an opportunity to construct a two story structure that meets the
setbacks, heights and other development standards of the zone. Therefore, in staff's
opinion, the existing grade is appropriate and workable for the purpose of measuring
height, and a dwelling meeting the height standards can reasonably be constructed on the
property.
Dodd Residence
August 7, 2003
Page 6
d. That the proposed grade being requested by the applicant is necessary for the
preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the applicant.
As discussed above, the applicant is requesting to establish a grade, and has designed a
structure, that is similar in design to other surrounding properties. The applicant is
somewhat limited in that the existing structure limits his design options in that it would be
difficult to provide the interior stairway access from the garage/basement level to the upper
living areas. In addition, the existing non - conforming structure at the front of the property
further limits the design options by requiring that the main structure be setback more than
the minimum 10 feet from Poppy Ave. Nevertheless, as discussed in finding "c" above, in
staff's opinion, the ability to design a dwelling that is consistent with surrounding dwellings
in terms of height, size and bulk is possible on the property. Therefore, staff believes that
this finding cannot be made in that the existing natural grade does not present an
impediment to the applicant's property rights, and the applicant already enjoys a
substantial property right with respect to the ability to utilize the property for residential
purposes.
Conclusion
If the request is denied, the structure proposed by the applicant would exceed the height
limits and would require substantial modification or the approval of a Variance application.
However, if the establishment of grade as requested by the applicant is approved, the
height of the structure would be within the height limits of the 24 -foot height limitation zone.
The height of the building is measured from grade to the mid -point of the sloped roof, with
the highest point of the roof (ridge line) not exceeding 29 feet.
In conclusion, while the applicant does have some limitations on his design options, in
staff's opinion the existing grades within the side yards of the property are clear and are as
close to natural grade as can be determined. Using the existing grades as natural grade
for the purpose of measuring height is consistent with Section 20.65.030.13.1. Additionally,
staff believes that the existing grade is workable for the purposes of establishing building
height; the grade proposed by the applicant is not comparable to the grades on the
properties to the north and south; and the applicant is not deprived of his property rights in
that a reasonable dwelling can be designed that is comparable to other residences built in
the neighborhood. Therefore, in staff's opinion, findings "a ", "c" and "d" as outlined in
Section 20.65.030.13.3 cannot be made, and staff recommends that the Planning
Commission deny the request by adopting the findings attached as Exhibit No. 1.
Environmental Review:
The proposed project qualifies for a categorical exemption from the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act under Class 3 (New Construction of Small
Structures). The establishment of grade is provided for within the Zoning Code for the
purposes of determining maximimum building height and does not result in a change in
land use or density and does not affect any significant environmental resources.
Dodd Residence
August 7, 2003
Page 7
Public Notice:
Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to property owners within
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 the
agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the city website.
Prepared by:
�/,G�tLaty ��C'.t�cszri�a.vry�iYYL
William Cunningham
Contract Planner
Exhibits:
1. Findings for denial
2. Adjacent property elevations
3. Applicant's letter of justification
4. Project plans
Submitted by:
Patricia L. Temple
Planning Director
FINDINGS FOR DENIAL
SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 2003 -002
ESTABLISHMENT OF GRADE FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 254 POPPY AVENUE
1. The grade proposed by the applicant for the purpose of measuring
building height is inconsistent with the intent of Municipal Code Section
20.65.030.13.1 in that it would result in an 11.5 -foot increase in the
allowable building envelope on the site, adjacent to Hazel Drive.
2. The proposed grade. being requested is unreasonable and is not
comparable with the grades of surrounding properties as evidenced by the
existing grades within the side yard of the subject property and adjacent
properties. And further, the establishment of the grade will be detrimental
to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of
persons residing or working in the neighborhood and will be detrimental or
injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or general
welfare of the City in that the natural grade can be established by
comparing the existing grade elevations on properties to the north and
south. By using those existing grades, the proposed dwelling would result
in a structure that is over the height limitations of the zone within which it
is located. In addition, other properties in the vicinity have maintained
height limits based on the natural grade.
3. The existing grade is appropriate and workable for the purpose of
measuring height in that the existing natural grade would permit a
structure to be designed that meets the development standards of the
zone and that is comparable to surrounding properties both in terms of
design and height.
4. The allowable building envelope resulting from the existing finished grade
of the site is adequate to provide a reasonable amount of development
within the required height limits for the site, and will not result in a hardship
or otherwise deprive the applicant of substantial development rights on the
property.
Exhibit No. 1 q
EXHIBIT NO.2
ADJACENT PROPERTY ELEVATIONS
S
\i
L
Flo
k
1.
�s
!RX TRAMT ASSOOIATES
LARRY and JAGKIE DODD
a�mna�Pa wqu
nw wmw
- - - - -- _ - -- 111
AN7P. w
W1f
iv.n FF. RPFMU
__ lionai.R PfYm
I R s
PA2003 -072 for SR2003 -002
254 Poppy Avenue
Date of Meeting:
MANY 9Y: .ID
MK ceav -oam
SME
SHE 3
aenaaa ogensrs
-----------------------
---------------
E L C--VAT- (OR
--------- ----------------
` Ik F
.. NORTH ELEVk7ic,
EXHIBIT NO. 3
APPLICANT'S LETTER OF JUSTIFICATION
15
07/15/03 07:30 FAX 714 641 1091 E T A
MmIG TRAWmT
ASSOCIATES
July 14, 2003
Nfr WilliamCtmnmgham
Planning Department
3300 Newport Boulevard,
Newport Beach, CA 92658
Subject LetlarofJrmti{nation
Raw SR2003- M(PA200"M- 254PoppyAvenua► Dodd ResWerm
Dear sir.
2OW1 RVME AVE
3UnE ONE
SANTA ANA HV16 "
OAUFORINA, 92701
PMO "!14.641.1306
FAXC: ,M4Lhr -1091
It has been rioted on a request to a t bWh glade tt 222 Poppy Ave that the subject t„ oPeity was
developed in the 1950's and original development plans are no longer available, However a
photograph was submitted that the original natural grade of the property was developed, so as to
establish a generally flat building pad on the upper portion of the site adjacent to Poppy.
In reference to Dodd's property, the basement garage was excavated at the Hazel Drive grade. 'lire
PDmog Dettt is req wft that to buts tg.haight be measured from the towered ti<lish 9aide. which
would be unwore.010 and overly restrictive- We are requesting to establish the building Height tram the
original grade as indicated on submitted elevations.
Also the planning staff & planning commission in far staff report dated march 7, 1991 for 222 Poppy
Ave, as written in the minutes Of the city council meeting April 8, 1991, OAR agree with what the natural
grade is and it would be inappropriate to approve this projad at eAsting grader.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions_
Sincerely,
Eric T abelt
16002
)ik
EXHIBIT NO. 4
PROJECT PLANS
s
4'
u
NY1d 2 119
0
m
gw
i¢F
Q C
o
N
'
ED
' w o
cv OF A�1►
CJ. .a
LL
IZZ
zags e_
b A
_i
Z Oy
o
6
o
aair"
13L
-
F f... I
UC
3
'g11
@g @
$9
i I
I
I
I
gds
ggill
g
I 1
g�
S? 4 94
n 4� 9E
F5 111 021
3N?JQ I�VFl
z
I d
I
�
I
-- - - - - --
Za I
�
Ji
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
/ I
I
I
I
I
- I
I
-F
.n
'gym
A
I
I
I
1
li
II
L II I
1
I
A I
I I
I
I
I I
% I
I 1
I I
I % I
I I n
I
c_
r
k°
1
n
'mo
wm
.wos a.ac ec r
4'
u
NY1d 2 119
Z
LIJ
m
gw
i¢F
Q C
o
N
'
ED
' w o
cv OF A�1►
CJ. .a
LL
IZZ
Q C5,
_�071Jt3
_i
Z Oy
o
- F
o
aair"
13L
4'
u
NY1d 2 119
? _
RRRRR R
5
it
Po4��W���C
�Iba l3ZVH
_�071Jt3
_i
IQ
I
-
F f... I
i I
I
I
I
, 1
I 1
1 I
I d
I I I
LL
Za I
r I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
/ I
I
I
I
I
- I
I
-F
.n
'gym
? _
RRRRR R
5
it
Po4��W���C
O f
0
0 6
a
a a c
E
Q
Q
J
a
z
d
MAUI,
0
8
u
a
a
J
I IM-11
�r aiw aooa'HVw m
3
ffi
5N011'd/�i3 �
a g
4 .r,
6
Fl
Ivall
�r
A �
Full
Ta
MR
¢ i
�A
�l i'
PHI I
jig 11 N 1. 0 s � � � 1 F a �r N
Nil 99
bz�
qb q
N S 79 pb FF)1 P� 8i1 01 MR' N Z
FF33 V m O Fa oQ�, g tl Oo SH N Fi .wr] .6
mjg b e ao "s 1 tl ° 9t 5 ooh $a
�b� S E m "
& $ s �
;pop a e „..
NO
® ®® b b� g $ m w z m "mac=. $
INN �a¢ g�
INN # '" N.0
to a �yywggg$mn p 99 yy �� p � ®g gpg
.i n 4 e m m m .. .7 '.7' 7 .. .. ti � ° r ., °a a 3 $d' $ H n °�o d°�ela °a ai $� $� � � � aci.0 9�� F�
a' 4 j
D ¢i ai W
a s N� m ww;<.yy¢WW
WI $ p N m N O� a� Q O W ¢ p 3�¢ Q N N z
W
V J
ti ti t\ 4 �: V 1 �: I�: � J
W as N
z
O
V
Y
M'
3AIE10 13ZFJH
l
❑ T p
00'Ob ro
CP43.00�B£.6£N IIC o /
`�• � -L11 -fit± -L �JJl� s �.
i
u
3AlHa 13ZVH
O�r 1NLr
00 DP