MONTECITO PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report for Schnur New Swimming Pool and As-Built Development Plan

Transcription

1 MONTECITO PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report for Schnur New Swimming Pool and As-Built Development Plan Deputy Director: Alice McCurdy Staff Report Date: March 27, 2014 Division: Development Review South Case No.: 13DVP Supervising Planner: Anne Almy Supervising Planner Phone #: Staff Contact: Ryan Cooksey Environmental Document: Exempt CEQA 15301&15303 Planner s Phone #: OWNER: Ron Schnur 935 Park Lane Santa Barbara, CA (805) AGENT: Project Site Jeremy Martinez 345 Rutherford Street Goleta, CA (805) This site is identified as Assessor Parcel Number , located at 935 Park Lane, in the Montecito area, First Supervisorial District. Application Complete: September 27, 2013 Processing Deadline: 60 days from NOE 1.0 REQUEST Hearing on the request of Jeremy Martinez, agent for the owner, Ron Schnur, to consider Case No. 13DVP , [application filed on August 23, 2013] for approval of an as-built Development Plan in compliance with Section of the Montecito Land Use and Development Code, on property zoned RMZ-40. The Development Plan would allow the development of a new swimming pool and hot tub and would also cover the existing permitted, asbuilt residence, including a modification to allow the residence to be 30 feet in height, a modification to allow for an existing retaining wall 17 feet in height, an attached garage, a tennis court, a pool equipment room and a ground mounted solar array. The request also includes a determination that the project is exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to State CEQA

2 Page 2 Guidelines Section and The application involves AP No , located at 935 Park Lane, in the Montecito area, First Supervisorial District. 2.0 RECOMMENDATION AND PROCEDURES Follow the procedures outlined below and conditionally approve Case No. 13DVP marked "Officially Accepted, County of Santa Barbara, April 16, 2014, Montecito Planning Commission Attachments A-D, based upon the project's consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, including the Montecito Community Plan, and based on the ability to make the required findings. Your Commission's motion should include the following: 1. Make the required findings for approval of the project specified in Attachment A of this staff report, including CEQA findings; Determine the project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guideline Sections and (e) of CEQA, included as Attachment C; and 3. Approve the project, Case No. 13DVP , subject to the conditions included as Attachment B. Refer back to staff if the Montecito Planning Commission takes other than the recommended action for appropriate findings and conditions. 3.0 JURISDICTION This project is being considered by the Montecito Planning Commission based on Section C of the Montecito Land Use and Development Code (MLUDC) which states that a Development Plan approval is required for all development, including grading, on parcels within the Resource Protection Zone. Pursuant to MLUDC Section B.3, the Montecito Planning Commission is the review authority for Final Development Plans with certain exceptions that are inapplicable here. 4.0 ISSUE SUMMARY Aesthetics: The project is proposed on a lot in Montecito zoned RMZ-40. The existing single family dwelling, tennis court and solar array were all previously permitted. Consistent with current ordinance requirements, this previously approved development is subject to an as built development plan. The proposed combined pool and spa are designed to match the Mediterranean architecture of the dwelling. The pool has been designed to incorporate sandstone and plaster along its retaining walls in order to match the existing aesthetic of the project site. These retaining walls would be a maximum of 5 feet in height. The proposed combined pool and

3 Page 3 spa would be located within the parcel s building envelope, approximately 50 feet south of the existing residence, on a graded area that previously served as a lawn. This area is set back from a steep slope and, accordingly, the proposed combined pool and spa would not be visible from public viewing areas (such as Park Lane, the nearest public road). Development Plan Modifications: The existing development includes a two story dwelling and a retaining wall which are legal nonconforming as to height. Under current regulations, development on the property is subject to a 16 foot height limit (as it is subject to Ridgeline Hillside s rural regulations), plus an additional 3 feet for structures with a roof pitch greater than 4:12, for a total height limit of 19 feet. The dwelling, with its 4:12 roof pitch, is 30 feet in height and, as such, exceeds the current height limit by 11 feet. The retaining wall is 17 feet in height and, as such, exceeds the current height limit by 1 foot. The applicant has requested a modification allowing for the dwelling s 30 foot height and the retaining wall s 17 foot height as part of the Development Plan (as allowed according to the MLUDC, section H.1). 5.1 Site Information 5.0 PROJECT INFORMATION Site Information Comprehensive Plan Designation Montecito Community Plan Area, Rural Area, MA-40 (Mountainous Area, one dwelling per 40-acres) Ordinance, Zone Montecito LUDC, RMZ-40 (Resource Protection Zone, 40- acre minimum parcel size), Montecito Hillside Overlay Site Size acres Present Use & Development Single-family residence, attached garage, tennis court, ground mounted solar array, retaining wall, pool equipment room Surrounding Uses/Zone(s) North: Vacant/RMZ-320 South: Single-family residence/2-e-1 East: Single-family residence/rmz-40 West: Single-family residence/rmz-40 Access Private driveway off Park Lane Public Services Water Supply: Montecito Water District Sewage: Montecito Sanitary District Fire: Montecito Fire Protection District 5.2 Description The project is a request of Jeremy Martinez, agent for the owner, Ron Schnur, for approval of a Final Development Plan in compliance with Section of the Montecito Land Use and Development Code, on property zoned RMZ-40. The proposed project would allow for the construction of a new, combined swimming pool and spa, measuring 14 feet by 67 feet, and to

4 Page 4 include under the Development Plan the existing permitted residence, attached garage, ground mounted solar array, 17 foot tall retaining wall, pool equipment room and tennis court. The dwelling and retaining wall are legal nonconforming as to height as they were approved in 1988, prior to the implementation of the Ridgeline Hillside guidelines. As such, the legal nonconforming dwelling s height of 30 feet exceeds its 16 foot Ridgeline Hillside height limit (plus three feet, as the dwelling s roof pitch is greater than 4:12). Additionally, the legal nonconforming retaining wall s height of 17 feet exceeds its 16 foot Ridgeline Hillside height limit. Accordingly, the applicant has requested the approval of a height modification under the Development Plan. The project would require 50 cubic yards of grading, as well as the excavation necessary to construct the swimming pool, and no trees would be removed. The parcel would continue to be served by the Montecito Fire Protection District, the Montecito Sanitary District and the Montecito Water District. Access would continue to be provided via a private driveway off of Park Lane. 5.3 Background Information Previous Approvals: The subject parcel is a result of Parcel Map No. 13,139, recorded on May 11, In December of 1988, Land Use Permit (LUP) was approved for construction of the existing residence, retaining wall, garage and tennis court. In July of 1989, Land Use Permit was approved for a swimming pool and spa (which have since been filled under 13CNP ), as well as a pool equipment room. In 2003, Land Use permit 03LUP was approved for the construction of a ground mounted solar array. At the time of approval of LUP and LUP , the subject parcel was zoned 3-E-1 (single-family residential, 3-acre minimum parcel size). At the time of the approval of LUP 03LUP , the subject parcel was zoned RMZ-40. Current Zoning: Following the adoption of the Montecito Community Plan in 1991, the zoning of the subject parcel was changed to RMZ-40 (Resource Protection Zone, 40-acre minimum parcel size). The purpose and intent of the Resource Protection Zone in the Montecito Land Use and Development Code is to protect lands that are unsuited for intensive development; limit development because of extreme fire hazards, minimum services, and/or environmental constraints; and encourage the preservation of these areas for uses including grazing, scientific and educational study, and limited residential uses. Development Plan Requirement: On May 20, 2008, the Board of Supervisors adopted changes to the Montecito RMZ zone requiring a Development Plan for all new development. 6.1 Environmental Review 6.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS The proposed project is exexmpt from environmental review pursuant to Sections (Existing Facilities) and (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Section

5 Page exempts the permitting of existing private structures (assuming there is no expansion of use) and Section exempts the construction of small structures, including a single family residence and accessory structures such as a swimming pool. The project consists of an existing single family dwelling, 17 foot tall retaining wall, attached garage, ground mounted solar array, pool equipment room and tennis court, none of which would be expanded in terms of use or size; and the construction of an accessory structure (swimming pool). As a result, the project is exempt from CEQA. Attachment C of this staff report contains the Notice of Exemption. 6.2 Comprehensive Plan Consistency The existing development on the subject parcel, consisting of a single family dwelling, attached garage, ground mounted solar array, pool equipment room and tennis court, were approved under Land Use Permits , and 03LUP Accordingly, the following analysis only addresses policy consistency with respect to the proposed construction of the combined swimming pool and spa. REQUIREMENT Land Use Development Policy 4: Prior to issuance of a development permit, the County shall make the finding, based on information provided by environmental documents, staff analysis, and the applicant, that adequate public or private services and resources (i.e., water, sewer, roads, etc.) are available to serve the proposed development... Hillside and Watershed Protection Policy 1: Plans for development shall minimize cut and fill operations. Plans requiring excessive cutting and filling may be denied if it is determined that the development could be carried out with less alteration of the natural terrain. Hillside and Watershed Protection Policy 2: All developments shall be designed to fit the site topography, soils, geology, hydrology, and any other existing conditions and be oriented so that grading and other site preparation is kept to an absolute minimum. Natural features, DISCUSSION Consistent: The parcel is currently developed with an existing single-family dwelling, 17 foot tall retaining wall, attached garage, tennis court and pool equipment room. The parcel would continue to be served by the Montecito Water District (MWD), the Montecito Sanitary District, and the Montecito Fire Protection District. Access for the parcel would continue to be provided off Park Lane (a public road). The project will not create a new significant demand for these services. Furthermore, the MWD has issued an intent to serve letter for the proposed pool and spa. Consistent: The project involves development within the previously graded development pad 50 feet south of the existing dwelling that is now planted in lawn. This area is essentially flat, thus the proposed pool would require only minor grading that would alter the topography of the site (approximately 50 cubic yards). Excavation necessary for the construction of the pool would not impact the topography of the site. Accordingly, the proposed pool has been sited and designed to minimize cut and fill operations, and to preserve natural features and landforms. No native trees or vegetation would be removed.

6 Page 6 REQUIREMENT landforms, and native vegetation, such as trees, shall be preserved to the maximum extent feasible... Policy GEO-M-l.2: Grading from future... projects in Montecito shall be minimized to the extent feasible in order to prevent unsightly scars in the natural topography due to grading, and to minimize the potential for earth slippage, erosion, and other safety risks. DISCUSSION Hillside and Watershed Protection Policy 7: Degradation of the water quality of groundwater basins, nearby streams, or wetlands shall not result from development of the site. Pollutants, such as chemicals, fuels, lubricants, raw sewage, and other harmful waste, shall not be discharged into or alongside coastal streams or wetlands either during or after construction. Policy AQ-M-l.3: Air pollution emissionsfrom new development and associated construction activities shall be minimized to the maximum extent feasible. These activities shall be consistent with the Air Quality Attainment Plan and Air Pollution Control District guidelines. project construction in Montecito shall follow all requirements of the SBAPCD and shall institute Best Available Control Technology (BACT) where necessary to reduce emissions below APCD thresholds. Development Standard AQ-M-1.3.1: Future applicant shall minimize the generation of fugitive dust during construction activities by observing the following: a. Minimize the amount of disturbed area; b. Utilize water and or dust palliatives; and c. Revegetate/stabilize disturbed area as soon as possible. Development Standard AQ-M-1.3.2: The Consistent: In order to ensure that construction-related materials (i.e. concrete wash, paint, solvents, etc.) are contained and disposed of properly during construction, Condition of Approval No. 4, included in Attachment B, would require the designation of a material wash-out area where such materials can be contained and removed from the site. Consistent: Condition of Approval No. 3, included in Attachment B, requires dust control measures to protect air quality and ensure consistency with air quality policy and development standards. The SBAPCD has no conditions on the proposed project.

7 Page 7 REQUIREMENT Policy F-M-2.1: The County shall cooperate with the Montecito Fire Protection District while reviewing Fire District requirements applied to ministerial and discretionary development projects regarding access, vegetation clearance, and improvements with the intent of protecting development from fire hazards while maintaining community character and quality of life and preventing adverse environmental impacts. Policy CR-M-2.1: Significant cultural, archaeological, and historic resources in the Montecito area shall be protected and preserved to the extent feasible. Policy N-M-1.1: Noise-sensitive uses (i.e., residential...) shall be protected from significant noise impacts. Development Standard N-M-1.1.1: All site preparation and associated exterior construction activities shall take place between 7:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., weekdays only. MCP Policy CIRC-M-1.4: The County shall strive to permit reasonable development of parcels within the community of Montecito based upon the policies and land use designations adopted in this Community Plan, while maintaining safe roadways and intersections that operate at acceptable levels. Policy VIS-M-1.1: Development shall be subordinate to the natural open space characteristics of the mountains. Policy VIS-M-1.2: Grading required for access roads and site development shall be limited in scope so as to protect the viewshed. Policy VIS-M-1.3: Development of property DISCUSSION Consistent: The Montecito Fire Protection District has reviewed and approved the existing access to the parcel as consistent with the applicable fire district requirements. Consistent: The project is located on a developed, disturbed site and is not known to contain cultural resources. Further, the construction of the proposed combined pool and spa would be subject to a Stop Work at Encounter condition (see Condition No. 5, Attachment B). Consistent: The proposed project would have the potential to create short-term construction-related noise impacts on neighboring residences during construction. Condition No. 7 included in Attachment B would require that construction activities be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m, weekdays only. The project would not cause any significant long-term noise impacts to the surrounding area. Consistent: Condition of Approval No. 8 included in Attachment B would require construction vehicle parking, equipment staging, and storage areas to be located onsite and outside of the road right-of-way of Park Lane or other nearby roads. Consistent: The proposed combined pool and spa will be constructed out of plaster and sandstone materials in order to blend into the natural visual character of the mountainous setting and would have no impacts to open space views. Retaining walls, 5 feet maximum in height are also proposed. These walls would be constructed of plaster and sandstone to match the existing development

8 Page 8 REQUIREMENT should minimize impacts to open space views as seen from public roads and viewpoints. DISCUSSION of the project site and site environs. Given these conditions, the proposed project would be subordinate to the surrounding setting. 6.3 Zoning: Land Use and Development Code Compliance The existing development on the subject parcel, consisting of a single family dwelling (30 feet in height), attached garage, 17 foot retaining wall and tennis court, was approved under Land Use Permit in The existing pool equipment room was approved by Land Use Permit in A ground mounted solar array was also constructed as approved by Land Use Permit 03LUP in Accordingly, the following analysis addresses the consistency of the existing development and the proposed construction of a combined swimming pool and spa with respect to the Montecito Land Use & Development Code. The existing tennis court, ground mounted solar array and pool equipment room comply with ordinance requirements. The existing retaining wall and single family dwelling with attached garage are legal nonconforming with respect to height. The height of the residence exceeds the 19 foot (16 feet plus 3 feet for a roof pitch of 4:12 or greater) height limit as defined by ordinance, but is otherwise in compliance. The height of the retaining wall (17 feet) exceeds the 16 foot height limit as defined by ordinance. The proposed combined pool and spa would be in conformance with applicable ordinance requirements. Allowed Land Uses. The proposed swimming pool is a permitted use in the RMZ zone (Section , Table 2-4). Height. The height limit for structures in the RMZ zone is 25 feet. However, the project is subject to the height limitations in the Ridgeline and Hillside Development Guidelines (Section C.1.b) because there is a 16-foot drop in elevation within 100 feet of the building site. These guidelines limit the height of structures in designated rural areas such as the subject parcel, to 16 feet, or 19 feet where the roof pitch is 4:12 or greater (Section D). The existing dwelling is legal nonconforming as it was approved prior to the implementation of the Ridgeline Hillside Guidelines and exceeds its 19 foot height limit by 11 feet. Similarly, the existing retaining wall is legal nonconforming as it was approved prior to the implementation of the Ridgeline Hillside Guidelines and exceeds its 16 foot height limit by 1 foot. Accordingly, in order for the dwelling and retaining wall to be brought into conformance, the applicant has requested that a modification be incorporated into the development plan. Section H.1 authorizes the Commission to modify a structure s height limits as approved under a Development Plan if the Commission finds that the modification is justified. In this instance, the modified height limits are justified as the dwelling and retaining wall were approved by Land Use Permit in 1998.

9 Page 9 The proposed combined pool and spa complies with the height limits. Setbacks. The subject parcel requires a front setback of 50 feet from road centerline and 20 feet from the edge of right-of-way. Side and rear setbacks are required to be at least 20 feet (Section A). All development, existing and proposed, would meet these setback requirements. Hillside Montecito District Overlay (H-MON). The proposed project is subject to the Montecito Hillside District Overlay (Section ). The proposed combined pool and spa complies with the required development standards specified in Section IV.C (Hillside Development Standards) of the Montecito Architectural Guidelines and Development Standards. Ridgeline and Hillside Development Guidelines. The proposed combined pool and spa complies with the MLUDC Ridgeline and Hillside Development Guidelines (Rural Areas) (Section C.1.b) as follows: 1. The height of a structure should not exceed 16 feet... The proposed pool and spa would not exceed the 16 foot (plus 3 feet for a roof pitch of 4:12 or greater) height limit. 2. Building rake and ridge line should conform to or reflect the surrounding terrain. The proposed pool and spa are unroofed and incorporate retaining walls 5 feet in maximum height. These walls would be constructed of plaster and sandstone to match the surrounding terrain. Further, the combined pool and spa would be placed on a graded portion of the existing building pad, thereby minimally impacting the surrounding topography. 3. Materials and colors should be compatible with the character of the terrain and natural surroundings of the site. The pool has been sited and designed to minimize visual impacts. Steps have been taken to soften the appearance of the pool walls, such as using a natural stone veneer that will blend with the natural landscape and plaster to match the existing residence. 4. Large, visually unbroken and/or exposed retaining walls should be minimized. The proposed combined pool and spa would include retaining with a maximum height of 5 feet. Accordingly, the project does not include large, exposed retaining walls. 5. Landscaping should be used to integrate the structure into the hillside, and shall be compatible with the adjacent vegetation. The proposed pool and spa would be located on a flat, graded area near the existing dwelling and would not require landscaping in order to be integrated into the hillside. 6. Grading shall be minimized, in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. All development has been sited and designed to minimize cut and fill operations, and to preserve natural features and landforms. Specific details are provided in the discussion of hillside and watershed protection in Section 6.2 above (Comprehensive Plan Consistency). 7. Development on ridgelines shall be discouraged if suitable alternative locations are available on the lot. The proposed pool would be located approximately 50 feet south

10 Page 10 of the residence, in a flat, graded, area that previously served as a lawn. No development on ridgelines is proposed. 6.5 Design Review As swimming pools and spas are exempt from design review, this project is exempt from design review (Montecito Land Use and Development Code, Section C). 7.0 APPEALS PROCEDURE The action of the Montecito Planning Commission may be appealed to the Board of Supervisors within 10 calendar days of said action. The appeal fee to the Board of Supervisors is $643. A. Findings B. Conditions of Approval C. CEQA Exemption D. Site Plan ATTACHMENTS