COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

Inter-Departmental Correspondence

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES AGENCY

DATE:

October 20, 2003

SET TIME:

9:45 a.m.

BOARD MEETING DATE:

November 4, 2003

TO:

Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM:

Marcia Raines, Director of Environmental Services

SUBJECT:

Consideration of an appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of a Resource Management Permit for a new 4,303 sq. ft. single-story residence and conversion of an existing 1,206 sq. ft. unit with 2-car carport to a second dwelling unit, pursuant to Sections 6319A and B, and Section 6428, respectively, of the County Zoning Regulations, located at 114 and 130 Hildebrand Road, in the unincorporated La Honda area of San Mateo County.

County File Number:

PLN 2002-00536 (McCracken)

RECOMMENDATION

Deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission's decision to approve the Resource Management Permit, County File Number PLN 2002-00536, by making the required findings and adopting the conditions of approval listed in Attachment A of this report.

PROPOSAL

The proposal includes a new 4,303 sq. ft. single-story residence, including a 724 sq. ft. 4-car garage, one 256 sq. ft. detached pool cabana, and a swimming pool. The project also includes conversion of an existing 1,206 sq. ft. single-story residence with 2-car carport to a second dwelling unit.

BACKGROUND

Report Prepared By: China F. Osborn, Project Planner, Telephone 650/599-7217

Appellant: Doris Ash

Owner/Applicant: Mike McCracken

Location: 114 and 130 Hildebrand Road, La Honda

APN: 078-220-130

Parcel Size: 20 acres

Existing Zoning: RM (Resource Management)

General Plan Designation: General Open Space

Existing Land Use: Single-Family Residential

Water Supply: Domestic Well

Sewage Disposal: Septic System Leachfield

Flood Zone: FEMA Flood Zone Map indicates the parcel is located in Zone C, area of minimal flooding, per Community Panel No. 060 311 350 B, effective July 5, 1984

Environmental Evaluation: Exempt under provisions of CEQA, Section 15303, Class 3, regarding construction of a single-family residence and Section 15301, Class 1, regarding conversion of the use of a structure from a primary dwelling unit to a second dwelling unit.

Setting: The project site is located in a rural residential area. The project is surrounded by residential development on all sides. The parcel has gradual slopes and many trees, but there is a flat, treeless area where the residence is proposed to be located. There is an existing well and septic system that will serve both residences on the parcel.

Date

Action

August 8, 2003

-

Original 40-acre parcel was subdivided into two 20-acre parcels.

June 29, 2002

-

Resource Management Permit for a 1,206 sq. ft. modular home and a domestic well is approved by Planning Division staff (130 Hildebrand Road).

September 5, 2002

-

The applicant submits an application for a Resource Management Permit to build a new single-family residence (114 Hildebrand) and convert the existing residence to a second dwelling unit.

July 31, 2003

-

Staff approves the Resource Management Permit for the new residence and conversion of the existing residence to a second dwelling unit. Appeal period begins.

August 12, 2003

-

An appeal of the proposed project is accepted by Planning Division staff.

September 24, 2003

-

Planning Commission considers and denies the appeal, approving the project with a vote of 4-0-1.

October 14, 2003

-

Planning staff receives an appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of the proposal.

November 4, 2003

-

Board of Supervisors hearing.

DISCUSSION

A.

PREVIOUS ACTION

The Planning Commission considered the proposal and voted 4-0-1 (Commissioner Silver abstaining) to deny the appeal and uphold staff's decision to approve this project.

B.

KEY ISSUES

1.

Grounds for Appeal

Following is an outline of the grounds of appeal submitted in the appellant's letter of appeal (see Attachment B), followed by the staff response.

a.

"I was not given adequate resources to present my case to the Planning Commission."

The day of September 24, 2003, the Planning Commission meeting was held in the Redwood City Library, as the usual meeting room was not available that day. Some visual aide equipment that is normally available to both staff and members of the public was not available that day. The Planning Commission gave all those wishing to speak adequate time and reviewed all written materials, photos, and other items presented to them.

b.

"Inadequate advise/consultation from Ms. Osborn" and "prejudice of the Planning Division."

Staff has met with and spoken to the appellant several times to better understand her concerns regarding the proposed project. Staff completed a site inspection with the appellant and the applicant's engineer to better understand the source of the appellant's concerns regarding the drainage problems in the area. Due to the concerns of the appellant, the Planning Division requested that the applicant submit a permanent drainage plan for the driveway, a requirement that is not usually requested until the building stage of a project. Staff feels that the applicant adequately addressed the appellant's concerns with the engineered drainage plan. Staff, therefore, recommended approval of the proposal at the Planning Commission meeting. The Planning Commission concurred with staff's analysis.

c.

"Inadequate information provided for the Planning Commission to make a fair judgment."

The appellant, at the Planning Commission meeting, requested that the Planning Commission consider an alternate location for the driveway, which would require that access to the applicant's residence be taken from an adjoining parcel.

The proposed roadway/driveway alignment generally follows the historic means of access along the southern boundary of this and the neighboring property, which includes the boundary with the appellant's property. The design of access improvements must be approved by County Fire (CDF) to provide adequate firefighting access. This involved designing the turn into the applicant's new driveway from the historic access opposite the appellant's rear property line.

It is true that this driveway is "directed" at the appellant's rear property line, but it is located on the opposite side of the historic access road and this design change was necessary to meet County Fire's access requirements. Regarding the possibility of the applicant locating the driveway on the neighboring property, the applicant has indicated that all attempts to contact that property owner regarding this matter have been ignored. Thus, even if such a driveway design met the requirements of CDF, the owner of the property to the east of the applicant has not indicated willingness to allow an easement on that property.

d.

"The issue of these two houses on this lot."

The appellant states a feeling that the second home on the lot has always had "tacit" approval from the Planning Division. The construction of a second home and the conversion of the original residence to a secondary residence has been evaluated on its own merits with individual review of its impact on the environment and compliance with the zoning regulations.

2.

Conformance with General Plan

Staff has determined that the project complies with all applicable General Plan policies, specifically the following:

Chapter 4 - Visual Quality. The proposal complies with Polices 4.23 (Rural Development Design Concept) and 4.24 (Location of Structures), which require that development in rural areas is subordinate to existing landscapes. The applicant is proposing a 1-story residence, far below the maximum height requirement of the zoning district. Additionally, the applicant is proposing to incorporate natural colors and materials into the design of the home, a clay roof with cedar trim, and a stucco and stone veneer exterior. The proposal does not include any tree removal and utilizes an existing flat area on the parcel for the proposed site for the residence. Staff believes that the location and design of the home will precipitate its incorporation into the natural beauty of the surrounding area and that the proposal is in full conformance with this policy.

3.

Conformance with Zoning Regulations

a.

Development Standards. The subject property is located in the Resource Management (RM) Zoning District. Both the new home and the second dwelling unit are required to comply with the Zoning Regulations. Following table summarizes the project's conformance with the Zoning Regulations, Sections 6319A and B:

b.

Development Review Criteria. Development in the Resource Management (RM) District is subject to review for compliance with the Development Review Criteria in Chapter 20A.2 of the County Zoning Regulations. A development review criteria checklist was completed by staff (see Attachment J) and the project was determined to be in compliance with these requirements.

c.

Second Dwelling Unit Criteria. Section 6428 of the County Zoning Regulations mandates criteria against which an application for a second dwelling unit must be reviewed. Staff has reviewed the project against criteria of that section and completed a "Second Dwelling Unit Checklist" to ensure the project's compliance with the regulations (see Attachment K). Staff has found the project to be in conformance with all applicable requirements for a second dwelling unit.

C.

REVIEW BY THE CUESTA LA HONDA GUILD

Staff referred this project to the Cuesta La Honda Guild on June 30, 2003. Staff received no comments from the Guild regarding the proposed project.

D.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

This project is exempt from environmental review under provisions of Section 15303, Class 3, of the California Environmental Quality Act, regarding construction of a single-family residence and Section 15301, Class 1, regarding conversion of the use of a structure from a primary dwelling unit to a second dwelling unit.

E.

REVIEWING AGENCIES

Department of Public Works

Building Inspection Section

Environmental Health Division

California Department of Forestry

Cuesta La Honda Guild

VISION ALIGNMENT

The project to construct a new single-family residence and convert an existing residence to a second dwelling unit keeps the commitment of offering a range of housing choices and goal number 9, which is to provide housing for "people at all income levels and for all generations of families." The proposal contributes to this commitment and goal by providing housing for two generations of a family that has lived in San Mateo County for may years.

ATTACHMENTS

A.

Recommended Findings and Conditions of Approval

B.

Appeal Letter and Attachments

C.

Assessor's Parcel Map

D.

Site Plan (entire parcel)

E.

Floor Plan (second unit)

F.

Site Plan (main residence)

G.

Floor Plan (main residence)

H.

Elevations (main residence)

I.

Drainage Plan (new driveway)

J.

Resource Management Permit Checklist

K.

Second Dwelling Unit Checklist

Attachment A

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES AGENCY

RECOMMENDED FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

Permit or Project File Number:

Board Meeting Date: November 4, 2003

PLN 2002-00536

Prepared By: China F. Osborn

For Adoption By: Board of Supervisors

RECOMMENDED FINDINGS

For the Environmental Review, Find:

1.

That this project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303, Class 3, regarding construction of a single-family residence and Section 15301, Class 1, regarding conversion of the use of a structure from a primary dwelling unit to a second dwelling unit.

For the Resource Management Permit, Find:

2.

That this project has been reviewed under and found to be in compliance with the Development Review Criteria as stipulated in Chapter 20.A of the County Zoning Regulations.

For the Design Review of the Second Dwelling Unit, Find:

3.

That the project as proposed, complies with the Design Review Standards, as outlined in Section 6565.15 of the Zoning Regulations.

RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

Planning Division

1.

This approval is for the project as described on the plans and documents reviewed by the Planning Commission on September 24, 2003. Any revisions to these approved plans must be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval prior to implementation. The Planning Director may approve minor adjustments to the project if they are consistent with the intent of and in substantial conformance with this approval. Any other development of the property will be subject to a separate permitting process.

2.

If, after one (1) year from the date of approval, the applicant has not obtained all other necessary permits and made substantial progress toward completing the proposed development, this Resource Management Permit will expire. The Resource Management Permit may be extended beyond one year if the applicant requests an extension in writing and submits payment of applicable extension fees at least sixty (60) calendar days before the expiration date.

3.

The applicant shall apply for and be issued a building permit and comply with all requirements of that permit prior to initiating and throughout the construction of the project. No grading or construction shall occur until the applicant has been issued a valid building permit for the proposed project.

4.

No tree cutting is allowed by this permit. Removal of any tree over 12 inches in diameter shall require a separate Resource Management Permit.

5.

The applicant shall install between the Hildebrand Road right-of-way and the rear property line of APNs 083-061-030 and -090 (owned by Doris Ash) a 6-foot wooden board fence, which extends the entire length of the Ash property line. Prior to the final Building Inspection approval, Planning Division staff shall verify the installation of the required fence.

6.

All new power and telephone utility lines to the proposed project shall be installed underground. The lines shall extend from the street or nearest existing utility pole to the main dwelling and/or any other structure on the property, and shall be placed underground.

7.

Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit to the Planning Division for review and approval an erosion control and stormwater management plan, which shows how the transport and discharge of pollutants from the project site will be minimized during construction. The plan shall emphasize the proper handling of construction materials and waste so as to prevent polluted water runoff from entering the local drainage systems and water bodies, and to protect all exposed earth surfaces from erosion forces. Said plan shall adhere to the San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program "General Construction and Site Supervision Guidelines," including:

a.

Stabilizing all denuded areas and maintaining erosion control measures continuously between October 15 and April 15.

b.

Removing spoils promptly, and avoiding stockpiling of fill materials when rain is forecast. If rain threatens, stockpiled soils and other materials shall be covered with a tarp of other waterproof material.

c.

Storing, handling, and disposing of construction materials and wastes so as to avoid their entry to a local storm drain system or water body.

8.

The erosion and sediment control plan, in addition to addressing the project construction, shall indicate how any erosion of excess soil from excavation will be prevented. The use of seeding or planting as a natural mechanism by which to prevent erosion is encouraged.

9.

Prior to the issuance of the building permit, the applicant must submit to the Planning Division for review and approval a permanent stormwater drainage plan, indicating permanent mitigation measures for the dispersal of rainwater from impervious surfaces. This plan, in addition to addressing drainage from the house, shall include an engineered drainage plan for the driveway that mitigates the potential for water from the driveway onto properties which front Roquena Drive, including a proposal to improve the existing swale along the northern edge of Hildebrand Road adjacent to the new driveway to prevent future overflow of that swale.

10.

Prior to the issuance of the building permit, the applicant shall submit two (2) color samples for each of the colors and materials to be used in the exterior of the home to the Planning Division for review and approval. Prior to the final Building Inspection approval, Planning Division staff shall verify approved colors and materials.

11.

The applicant is required to take any excess dirt from excavation that is not proposed to be relocated on site to an approved collection facility.

12.

The applicant is required to monitor the noise level at the site so that the proposed construction activity will not exceed 80 dBA at any one moment in time. No construction related noise shall exceed those limits mandated by the County Noise Ordinance. Construction activities shall be limited to the hours from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., on Saturday. Construction operations shall be prohibited on Sunday and any national holiday.

Department of Public Works

13.

Prior to the issuance of the building permit, the applicant will be required to provide payment of "roadway mitigation fees" based on the square footage (assessable space) of the proposed building per Ordinance #3277.

14.

The applicant shall submit, for review by the Department of Public Works and the appropriate Fire District, a plan and profile of both the existing and the proposed access from the nearest "publicly" maintained roadway to the proposed building site.

15.

The provision of San Mateo County Grading Ordinance shall govern all grading on and adjacent to this site. Unless exempted by the Grading Ordinance, the applicant may be required to apply for a grading permit upon completion of their review of the plans and should access construction be necessary.

16.

The applicant shall submit a driveway "plan and profile," to the Department of Public Works, showing the driveway access to the parcel (garage slab) complying with County standards for driveway slopes (not to exceed 20%) and to County standards for driveways (at the property line) being the same elevation as the center of the access roadway. When appropriate, this plan and profile shall be prepared from elevations and alignment shown on the roadway improvement plans. The driveway plan shall also include and show specific provisions and details for both the existing and the proposed drainage patterns and drainage facilities.

17.

The applicant shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works and the appropriate Fire District or Fire Marshal, that the existing road access from the nearest "publicly" maintained roadway to the building site meets or exceeds the County's minimum standards for an "interim access roadway," including provisions for existing and proposed drainage and drainage facilities. The applicant must also demonstrate that appropriate turnouts and a turnaround, meeting Fire Marshal requirements, exist or can be provided, if applicable.

18.

Should the above plan for access not meet the County's minimum standard for "safe and adequate" as provided by the "interim access roadway," the applicant shall have designed, by a registered civil engineer, and the applicant shall construct an "interim access roadway." Said roadway shall be a minimum of 16 feet wide with one-foot shoulders and shall show specific provisions and details for the handling of both the existing drainage and the proposed drainage, including drainage structures. Roadway grades shall not exceed 15%. These plans for access shall also meet all conditions and requirements of the appropriate fire jurisdiction, including, but not limited to, the construction of turnouts and turnarounds.

19.

Plans, with specific construction details, shall be stamped and signed by the registered civil engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval prior to construction.

20.

Erosion and sediment control during the course of this grading work shall be according to a plan prepared and signed by the engineer of record, and approved by the Department of Public Works and the Planning Division. Revisions to the approved erosion and sediment control plan shall be prepared and signed by the engineer.