20050208_es

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

Inter-Departmental Correspondence

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES AGENCY

DATE:

January 24, 2005

BOARD MEETING DATE:

February 8, 2005

SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING:

10 days, within 300 ft.

VOTE REQUIRED:

Majority

TO:

Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM:

Marcia Raines, Director of Environmental Services

SUBJECT:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Consideration of a Coastside Design Review Permit, pursuant to Sections 6565.4 and 6328.5 of the County Zoning Regulations, to construct a new single-family residence on a 5,000 sq. ft. parcel located on 2nd Street, in the unincorporated Montara area of the County. (Appeal from decision of the Planning Commission denying the Design Review). This project is not appealable to the California Coastal Commission.

RECOMMENDATION

Deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the Planning Commission and deny the Design Review permit, County File Number PLN 1999-00215, by making the findings of denial as listed in Attachment A.

VISION ALIGNMENT

Commitment: (Number 9; Partnerships); “Effective and Collaborative Government.”

Goal: Number 20; “Government decisions are based on careful consideration of future impact, rather than temporary relief or immediate gain.”

The Planning Commission’s decision considered the future impacts of the house design on the surrounding neighbors, concluding that they were not willing to dismiss such concerns merely to accommodate the “immediate gains” posed by the applicant’s desire to construct and sell a house.

BACKGROUND

Proposal: The applicant is proposing to construct a new 2,982 sq. ft. single-family residence, including a 400 sq. ft. detached garage and the removal of three trees.

Planning Commission Action: On April 14, 2004, the Planning Commission voted to deny the Design Review application (3-1; Commissioner Kennedy had recently resigned and had not yet been replaced). The Planning Commission denied the project because it did not comply with select Design Review standards: (1) it was not designed and situated so as to retain and blend with the natural vegetation and landform in that the proposed structure does not blend with the natural contours of the site, and (2) it was not in harmony with the shape, size and scale of adjacent buildings in the community in that the proposed structure does not relate to adjacent buildings and to the neighborhood.

DISCUSSION

The project was one of two Design Review (DR) applications (the other: PLN 1999-00015) for new single-family homes on two adjacent parcels submitted in February 1999. Both projects had their initial DR approvals rescinded due to inadequate public notification. Upon thorough re-noticing, review and neighborhood comments, both projects have incurred similar degrees of strong opposition from the neighbors and Midcoast Community Council, based on their bulk, size and design relative to applicable DR standards, site topography, and comparative surrounding development. In response to the subject project, the applicant has made few substantial design modifications to the house beyond minor articulation changes to the exterior and various relocations of the garage. Initially, the subject project’s DR permit was approved by the Planning Director in October 2000. That decision was appealed by many local residents to the Planning Commission in January 2001, who upheld the appeal and denied the DR application. Upon appeal by the applicant to the Board of Supervisors in August 2001, the Board of Supervisors remanded the project back to the Planning Commission for redesign and the Planning Commission’s reconsideration. Despite the applicant submitting several minor modifications to the project in the interim, the Planning Commission subsequently denied the applicant’s appeal and the DR application in April 2004. The applicant has appealed that decision to the Board of Supervisors. Additionally, in December 2004, the applicant submitted slightly revised plans for the house, but only similar to plans submitted in October 2001.

FISCAL IMPACT

No fiscal impact.



COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES AGENCY

DATE:		January 24, 2005
BOARD MEETING DATE:		February 8, 2005
SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING:		10 days, within 300 ft.
VOTE REQUIRED:		Majority

TO:	Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM:	Marcia Raines, Director of Environmental Services

SUBJECT:	EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Consideration of a Coastside Design Review Permit, pursuant to Sections 6565.4 and 6328.5 of the County Zoning Regulations, to construct a new single-family residence on a 5,000 sq. ft. parcel located on 2nd Street, in the unincorporated Montara area of the County. (Appeal from decision of the Planning Commission denying the Design Review). This project is not appealable to the California Coastal Commission.


RECOMMENDATION

Deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the Planning Commission and deny the Design Review permit, County File Number PLN 1999-00215, by making the findings of denial as listed in Attachment A.

VISION ALIGNMENT

Commitment: (Number 9; Partnerships); “Effective and Collaborative Government.”

Goal: Number 20; “Government decisions are based on careful consideration of future impact, rather than temporary relief or immediate gain.”

The Planning Commission’s decision considered the future impacts of the house design on the surrounding neighbors, concluding that they were not willing to dismiss such concerns merely to accommodate the “immediate gains” posed by the applicant’s desire to construct and sell a house.

BACKGROUND

Proposal: The applicant is proposing to construct a new 2,982 sq. ft. single-family residence, including a 400 sq. ft. detached garage and the removal of three trees.

Planning Commission Action: On April 14, 2004, the Planning Commission voted to deny the Design Review application (3-1; Commissioner Kennedy had recently resigned and had not yet been replaced). The Planning Commission denied the project because it did not comply with select Design Review standards: (1) it was not designed and situated so as to retain and blend with the natural vegetation and landform in that the proposed structure does not blend with the natural contours of the site, and (2) it was not in harmony with the shape, size and scale of adjacent buildings in the community in that the proposed structure does not relate to adjacent buildings and to the neighborhood.

DISCUSSION

The project was one of two Design Review (DR) applications (the other: PLN 1999-00015) for new single-family homes on two adjacent parcels submitted in February 1999. Both projects had their initial DR approvals rescinded due to inadequate public notification. Upon thorough re-noticing, review and neighborhood comments, both projects have incurred similar degrees of strong opposition from the neighbors and Midcoast Community Council, based on their bulk, size and design relative to applicable DR standards, site topography, and comparative surrounding development. In response to the subject project, the applicant has made few substantial design modifications to the house beyond minor articulation changes to the exterior and various relocations of the garage. Initially, the subject project’s DR permit was approved by the Planning Director in October 2000. That decision was appealed by many local residents to the Planning Commission in January 2001, who upheld the appeal and denied the DR application. Upon appeal by the applicant to the Board of Supervisors in August 2001, the Board of Supervisors remanded the project back to the Planning Commission for redesign and the Planning Commission’s reconsideration. Despite the applicant submitting several minor modifications to the project in the interim, the Planning Commission subsequently denied the applicant’s appeal and the DR application in April 2004. The applicant has appealed that decision to the Board of Supervisors. Additionally, in December 2004, the applicant submitted slightly revised plans for the house, but only similar to plans submitted in October 2001.

FISCAL IMPACT

No fiscal impact.