City of Oceanside Planning Commission Workshop

Transcription

1

2 Objectives Clarify how reinstatement of the 86 Code has changed bldg. height standards in the study area Emphasize that bldg. height standards for residential areas within the Coast Highway Vision and Strategic Plan (CHVSP) were considered during the CHVSP public outreach process Solicit and respond to community expectations Provide a range of possible alternatives Consider how much discretion is afforded to both Planning Division staff and the Planning Commission under current policies, regulations and guidelines in their evaluation of building height.

3 Background Study Area Boundaries

4 Background Study Area Boundaries

5 Background During the public outreach process associated with the preparation of the 1992 Zoning Ordinance, participants in public forums signaled a desire for more restrictive residential building height limits in those portions of the Coastal lzone located outsideof tid the RDA. In keeping with this sentiment, the following provision was placed into the 1992 Code: Buildings or structures located on lots within the Townsite area southerly of the Downtown District boundaries and the South Oceanside Neighborhood Planning Areas shall be limited in height to two stories or 27 feet, whichever is less.

6 Background In the spring of last year, upon discovery that the City s Citys 1992 Zoning Ordinance had never been certified by the California Coastal Commission (CCC), both the City and CCC staff determined that Coastal Zone properties located outside tid of the RDA were once again subject to review under the previously applicable 1986 Zoning Ordinance. Since this determination, the Planning Commission has reviewed and approved three residential projects that benefit from the less restrictive building height limits of the 1986 Code.

7 Background No formal opposition to these three projects was expressed during the review process. However, some CZ stakeholders have informally expressed concerns that added bldg. height could adversely impact neighborhood character & public views. Upon approval of the 3 rd project, the PC asked staff to clarify the bldg. height standards of the 86 Code as well as the Commission s s discretion to deny or condition projects on the basis of bldg. height.

8 Background Changes to Residential Bldg. Height Standards Max. Residential Bldg. Height (Townsite and South Oceanside) Max. Residential Bldg. Height (Eastside Capistrano) 1986 Zoning Ordinance (Applicable as of May 11, 2009) 1992 Zoning Ordinance (Superseded as of May 11, 2009) 35 feet 27 feet 35 feet 36 feet Basis for Height Measurement Average Finished Grade Existing Grade Method of Height Measurement Not Specified Code Section 3017

9 Background CCC staff has expressed no expectation that the City will reconcile the height standards of the 1986 Ordinance with those of the 1992 Ordinance. CCC staff has indicated that if building height standards are to be amended, the issue of how height is measured should be addressed. CCC staff has also said that the City should codify standards for dealing with nonconformities created by changes to current height standards.

10 Existing Conditions Eastside Capistrano

11 Existing Conditions Cleveland and Tremont

12 Existing Conditions South Oceanside

13 Existing Conditions S. Pacific/Tait/S. Myers

14 Regulatory Framework General Plan Architecture (1.23) Topographic Resources (1.24) Local Coastal Program Coastal Act policies LCP objectives and policies Design guidelines Section of the California Coastal Act The scenic and visual qualities of coastal areas shall be considered and protected as a resource of public importance. Permitted development shall be sited and designed to protect views to and along the ocean and scenic coastal areas, to minimize the alteration of natural land forms, to be visually compatible with the character of surrounding areas, and, where feasible, to restore and enhance visual quality in visually degraded areas.

15 Regulatory Framework Projects located outside of the Appealable Area and not subject to other discretionary approvals require Administrative Coastal Permits Projects located within the Appealable Area and/or subject to other discretionary approvals require Regular Coastal Permits Required findings for approval of ACP s and RCP s: That the project conforms to the Local Coastal Plan, including the policies of that Plan; That all development within the Appealable Area conform to the public access and recreation policies of the Coastal Act

16 Alternatives Standards in Nearby Coastal Jurisdictions Most cities have more restrictive height limits than Oceanside Average height limit: 28 feet Some cities place additional height restrictions on development on sloping lots Some cities require that development above the ground level be stepped back Some cities have an overall maximum height limit Most cities measure building height from the lower of either existing or finished grade to the top of the roof

17 Alternatives Standards in Nearby Coastal Jurisdictions Some cities encourage pitched roofing Most cities place greater restrictions on height projections than those now applied in Oceanside Relative to the CBC definition of basement, most cities have basement definitions that make it harder to achieve daylighting Many cities require certified topographic exhibits as part of the conceptual review process Del Mar and Solana Beach require story poles and conduct extensive view impact analysis (including assessment of private view impacts)

18 Alternatives Other Development Standards Intended to Mitigate Building Height Impacts Minimum setbacks based on building height (i.e. the taller the structure, the greater the required setbacks) FAR s for upper stories (i.e. upper story floor area is limited to a percentage of ground level floor area) Limits on the height, length or overall square footage of unbroken wall planes Building height limits based on lot size or lot frontage Requirement that primary entrances be placed on front elevations

19 Alternatives Design Strategies to Be Considered on a Case by Case Basis Siting structures away from the high side of the lot Conforming bldg. mass to the contours of the lot (i.e. stepping) Incorporatingpitched pitched roofelements andotherforms ofvertical articulation (towers, cupolas, cornices, corbels, etc.) Integrating roof deck stairways to avoid height projections Using high quality roofmaterials (single barrel tile, concrete shingles, metal, etc.) Modulating façades and avoiding large expanses of unbroken wall surfaces Incorporating extensive and balanced fenestration

20 Alternatives Design Strategies to Be Considered on a Case by Case Basis Creating prominent entryways, particularly on front elevations Recessing garage doors, entry doors and windows Using high quality andrichly richly textured wall finishes (lap siding, stone, brick, smooth lime plaster, etc.) Incorporating bay or bow windows, pediments, eyebrows, awnings, shutters andotherarchitectural architectural features Incorporating decks and balconies with decorative railings Maintaining open side yards with low and/or substantially transparent fencing Using extensive, well placed and vertically oriented landscaping

21 Next Steps Field immediate questions/concerns of the Commission Field immediate questions/concerns of the Commission Solicit input from members of the public Share from illustrative materials, as directed by the Commission and/or members of the public Following this 1 st workshop, provide for a public comment period Study the implications of suggested alternatives & prepare a follow up memo outlining the most viable options Convene a 2 nd workshop to identify & refine preferred alternatives

22

23 Basements The basement definition in the 86 Z.O. precludes the daylight basements commonly found along the west side of S. Pacific St. While previous iterations of the building code allowed for more than one daylight basement, only one such basement can be achieved under the current building code, as exemplified below.

24 Basements Shown below are dwellings sited on the west side of S. Pacific Street with habitable levels defined as basements. This definition has allowed these structures to stay within the story limits of the 86 and 92 Codes.

25 Basements Under the current building code definition, basements can potentially daylight at both the front and rear elevations of the structure when the finished grade is raised above the pre existing grade, as in the example below.

26 These exhibits illustrate the concept of maximum overall grade, typically applied in conjunction with a standard height limit to discourage excessively tall structures on the lower side of sloping properties. City of Oceanside