Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.2 TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS March 25, 2004 Staff Report to the Planning Commission RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR A POOL AND SPA AND A VARIANCE TO ALLOW POOL DECK ENCROACHMENT INTO SETBACKS; LANDS OF - SPECTOR AND ANIlVIER; 26625 ST. FRANCIS DRIVE;#193 03-ZP-SD-VAR. Debbie Pedro, Associate Planner -5>? APPROVED BY: Carl Cahill,Planning Director ac, RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission: -- - Approve the requested Site Development Permit and Variance, subject to the recommended conditions and findings of approval in Attachments 1 and 2 BACKGROUND The subject property is located at 26625 St. Francis Drive. The parcel is bounded by single family homes on adjacent properties to the east, west, and north, and single family homes across St. Francis Drive to the south. The property is 1.003 acres in size and has a 7.5% average slope. The applicant is proposing to replace an existing pool with adjoining decking that partially encroaches within the side yard setback. The proposed pool and spa will be constructed outside the setbacks but the replacement pool deck will encroach within the east setback by up to twelve (12')feet. CODE REQUIREMENTS Per Sections 10-1.401 and 10-1.1103 of the Los Altos Hills Municipal Code, this application for a new pool, spa and decking has been forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and approval. Zoning Code review encompasses analysis of development area requirements and setbacks. The evaluation of the Variance should include many of the same items, concurrently evaluating the physical site conditions which result in an undue hardship on the applicant. Pursuant to Sec. 10-1.1107(2) of the Zoning Code, the approval of a Variance also requires that certain findings be approved by the Planning Commission. Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Spector and Ammer 26625 St.Francis Drive March 25,2004 Page 2 of 7 DISCUSSION Site Data: Gross Lot Area: 1.003 acres Net Lot Area: 1.003 acres Average Slope: 7.5 % Lot Unit Factor: 1.003 Floor Area and Development Areas: Area(sq.ft.) Maximum Existing Proposed Increase Remaining Development 15,045 11,749 12,041 292 3,004 Floor 6,018 4,966 4,966 0 1,052 Outdoor Lighting No additional outdoor lighting is proposed except for underwater lighting in the pool and spa. Grading &Drainage The Engineering Department has reviewed the plans and has recommended conditions of approval as specified in Attachment #1. Drainage is designed to sheet flow and to maintain existing drainage flow patterns. Final "as-built" grading and drainage will be inspected by the Engineering Department, and any deficiencies will be required to be corrected prior to final inspection. Variance The existing swimming pool was approved to be constructed in the rear yard at 30' from the property line (Building Permit #303 dated October 27, 1958). The Town has no record of when the adjacent decking was constructed but based on the condition of the concrete, it appears that the deck was possibly installed at around the time of pool construction. A portion of the existing pool decking (368 sq. ft.) encroaches up to twelve (12') feet into the side yard setback. The applicant is proposing to replace it with 366 sq. ft. of new decking in the same location. The new deck will not extend any further into the setbacks and there will be a net reduction of 2 sq. ft. within the setback. Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Spector and Ammer 26625 St.Francis Drive March 25,2004 Page 3 of 7 Required Existing Proposed 'a Existing Propose4 , s Rear Setback Deck Setback Deck Setback Are m Setback Area inpSetback y 'V t,. -' ^.tom• _ 3._..» ... _ _ ..�Kms r:_. . •.ti �., _t- 30' 18' 18' 368 sq. ft. 366 sq.ft. Thea applicant is requesting a Variance to rebuild the existing pool deck within the 30' PP q g east property line setback. Pursuant to section 10-1.401.c of the Municipal Code, a property owner could substantially rebuild a legal nonconforming structure on the unless the Planning property unl g Commission finds that: 1) The structure could be relocated elsewhere on the site, accommodating the same square footage and development area existing previously without substantial environmental damage, and 2) Relocation of the structure would substantially reduce adverse visual or privacy impacts to neighbors or to the general public. Relocation of Structure without Substantial Environmental Damage Although it is possible to rebuild a similar sized pool deck in an alternate location to conform with setback requirements, the applicant has indicated that the existing location of the deck is the most practical because it is within a reasonable distance from the outdoor barbeque and bathroom situated on the east side of the house. In designing the new pool and deck, the applicants have considered shifting the pool, spa, and decking twelve (12') feet to the west to comply with setback requirements. However, it is not feasible to move the pool further to the west than its current proposed location because it will interfere with existing sewer lines on the property. Reduction of Adverse Visual or Privacy Impacts The existing deck that partially encroaches within the side yard setback appears to have no adverse visual or privacy impacts to neighbors or to the general public. A number of existing trees and shrubs along the fence line provide adequate screening of the pool and decking from the adjacent neighbor's views and no portion of the deck is visible from the street. The applicant is not proposing to remove any trees or shrubs on the property. In addition, the adjacent neighbor at 26595 Ascension Drive has submitted a letter to the Town on January 28, 2004 stating that they have no objections to the proposed pool and deck plans. (Attachment 5) Therefore, relocating the deck to another area of the yard will not serve to reduce any adverse visual or privacy impacts. Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Spector and Ammer 26625 St.Francis Drive March 25,2004 Page 4 of 7 Conclusions According to the applicants, the strict enforcement of the code would result in practical difficulties for them to replace the pool and decking because the location of the pool is constrained by the existing sewer lines immediately west of the new pool area. Furthermore, relocating the deck to another area of the yard outside of the setbacks will separate the pool deck from the existing outdoor barbeque and bathroom areas. Variance findings submitted by the applicant are included in this staff report for Commission review. (Attachment 2) If the Commission decides to approve the Variance request, the applicant's findings (Attachment 2) should be cited. If the Commission decides to deny the Variance request, staff should be directed to prepare findings for denial and make the appropriate revisions to the conditions of approval. Committee Review The Environmental Design Committee has reviewed the proposal and has no comments. CEQA STATUS The project is categorically exempt under Class 1 of the State CEQA Guidelines ATTACHMENTS 1. Recommended conditions of approval 2. Findings of approval for the Variance 3. Site Map 4. Worksheet#2 5. Letter from neighbor at 26595 Ascension Drive dated January 28, 2004 6. Recommendations from Environmental Design Committee dated October 10, 2003 7. Development plans: site,pool and pool decking plans cc: David Spector and Karen Ammer 26625 St. Francis Drive Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Spector and Ammer 26625 St.Francis Drive March 25,2004 Page 5 of 7 ATTACHMENT 1 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR A SWIMAIING POOL, SPA AND DECK LANDS OF SPECTOR AND AMAMR, 26625 ST. FRANCIS DRIVE File# 193-03-ZP-SD-VAR PLANNING DEPARTMENT: 1. No other modifications to the approved plans are allowed except as otherwise first reviewed and approved by the Planning Director or the Planning Commission, depending on the scope of the changes. 2. The swimming pool and spa must be located a minimum of 30' from the side property line. 3. Standard swimming pool conditions: a) Lights shall be designed so that the source is not visible from off-site. b) Drainage outfall structures shall be constructed and located to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. C) Equipment shall be enclosed on all four sides with a roof for noise mitigation and screening. 4. For swimming pools, at least one of the following safety features shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Town Building Official: a) The pool shall be isolated from access to the residence by an enclosure (fencing). b) The pool shall be equipped with an approved safety pool cover. c) The residence shall be equipped with exit alarms on those doors providing direct access to the pool. d) All doors providing direct access from the home to the swimming pool shall be equipped with a self-closing, self-latching device with a release mechanism placed no lower than 54 inches above the floor. 5. The new deck shall be located a minimum of 18' from the east property line. Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Spector and Ammer 26625 St.Francis Drive March 25,2004 Page 6 of 7 6. No new outdoor lighting is approved except for underwater lights for the pool and spa. Any outdoor lighting requires approval by the Planning Department prior to installation. Lighting shall be down shielded, low wattage, shall not encroach or reflect on adjacent properties, and the source of the lighting shall not be visible from off the site. No lighting may be placed within setbacks except for two driveway or entry lights. 7. Additional landscaping may be required. Staff will visit the site prior to final inspection to determine if any additional plantings will be needed for screening or to restore areas disturbed by grading or construction. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT: 8. The site drainage associated with the proposed development must be designed as surface flow wherever possible to avoid concentration of the runoff. The proposed drainage shall be designed to maintain the existing flow patterns. Final drainage and grading shall be inspected by the Engineering Department and any deficiencies corrected to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department prior to final inspection. 9. Any, and all, changes to the approved grading and drainage plan shall first be approved by the Town Engineering Department. No grading shall take place during the grading moratorium (November 1 and April 1) except with prior approval from the City Engineer. No grading shall take place within ten feet of any property line. 10. The location and elevation of the pool and decking shall be certified in writing by a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor as being in/at the approved location and elevation shown on the approved Site Development plan prior to final inspection. 11. Two copies of an erosion and sediment control plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Engineering Department prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. The contractor and the property owner shall comply with all appropriate requirements of the Town's NPDES permit relative to grading and erosion/sediment control. All areas on the site that have the native material disturbed shall be protected for erosion control during the rainy season and shall be replanted prior to final inspection. 12. The property owner shall inform the Town of any damage and shall repair any damage caused by the construction of the project to pathways, private Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Spector and Ammer 26625 St.Francis Drive March 25,2004 Page 7 of 7 driveways, and public and private roadways, prior to final inspection and shall provide the Town with photographs of the existing conditions of the roadways and pathways prior to acceptance of plans for building plancheck. 13. Two copies of a grading and construction operation plan shall be submitted by the property owner for review and approval by the City Engineer and Planning Director prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. The grading/construction plan shall address truck traffic issues regarding dust, noise, and vehicular and pedestrian traffic.safety on St. Francis Drive and surrounding roadways; storage of construction materials; placement of sanitary facilities; parking for construction vehicles; clean-up area, and parking for construction personnel. A debris box (trash dumpster) shall be placed on site for collection of construction debris. Arrangements must be made with the Los Altos Garbage Company for the debris box, since they have a franchise with the Town and no other hauler is allowed within the Town limits. CONDITION NUMBERS 11, 12, AND 13 SHALL BE COMPLETED AND SIGNED OFF BY THE PLANNING AND ENGINEERING DEPARTMENTS PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR PLAN CHECK BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. I Project approval may be appealed if done so in writing within 23 days of the date of this ISI notice. The building permit cannot be issued until the appeal period has lapsed. The applicant may submit construction plans to the Building Department after April 17, 2004, provided the applicant has completed all conditions of approval required prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. Upon completion of the construction, a final inspection shall be required to be set with the Planning and Engineering Departments two weeks prior to final building inspection approval. NOTE: The Site Development permit is valid for one year from the approval date (until March 25, 2005). All required building permits must be obtained within that year and work on items not requiring a building permit shall be commenced within one year and completed within two years. ATTACHMENT Karen A. Ammer -AECEIVED David M. Spector 26625 St Francis Road MAR 0 9 2004 Los Altos Klls, CA 94022 TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS March 9, 2004 Planning Department Town of Los Altos Hills 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 Re: Pool. Spa and Pool Deck at 26625 St.Francis Road To Whom It May Concern: We hereby submit the following findings in support of our application for a variance: 1. The proposed project entails (a) removal of an existing swimming pool and deck and (b) replacement with a new pool, spa and deck. The existing pool deck was constructed in the 1960's and is located, in part, between the property line and the setback line (that is, it is "within the setback"). The existing pool is not within the setback. The proposed new pool and spa are also conforming, and are located substantially in the area of the existing pool. • It is not reasonable for us to relocate the pool deck to another side of the pool because: i. A built-in gas barbeque is located near the current pool deck area; and ii. The bathroom used by persons using the pool is also located near the current pool deck area. • These conditions result from the irregular shape of the lot and placement of the house on the lot, when it was originally built in the late 1950's. • It also would pose a hardship for us to shift the location of the entire pool and pool deck further from the affected property line due to the presence of a sewer line. The proposed new pool is as close as is practicable from the existing sewer line. • Because of shape of the lot, moving the pool further from the sewer line would result in further encroachment on the setback. We thus are limited with respect to placement of the pool. In sum, due to unusual conditions applicable to our property, strict adherence to the setback would prevent us from continuing to have our pool deck/ entertainment area within a reasonable distance from the barbeque and bathroom, and would create issues with the sewer line. These conditions would prevent normal enjoyment of our pool and barbeque area. 2. We already have a pool deck that could be repaired in its present location without a variance. Therefore, no "special privileges" would be allowed by granting the variance. In addition, the proposed variance results in an overall reduction of development within the setback. 3. The granting of the variance will not harm the surrounding community. The neighbors whose home abuts the affected setback have reviewed the project plans. These neighbors do not object to the proposed variance and have signed a letter addressed to the Town stating that they do not object to encroachment onto the setback by the proposed new deck. In addition, there is substantial natural screening on both sides of the affected property line. 4. The proposed variance will not allow a use or activity that is not expressly authorized by the zoning ordinance. Upon completion of the new pool, deck and spa, the property will continue to be used in the same manner as we have used it in theP ast. Respectfully submitted, Karen A. Ammer 2 . - - . . •"� "R'. ri :a q.x i �� a $�•+��y°xa +� i' a -_S .9 I�SayiFi +,v fie. `i: a yr a`" $ J;..c r.,^� ` , findy >.J`� �h.,a r �" pir} r, '.'+^i r f .•ta x `h• `y i ,Er 'Eli ! [[� ., .s�aa r� Y;p., � s a >,+.�r t7'iF" '.• } ✓ _ .#` y-a .Set h }_ � '`" � r •ry 3 - '�ai � �'. YY '•+� .[, � 4 �"- ,:.h S� a y`-.,A,� � T �,�„r. ,x r <F i�y +"��f,'[4' _.,�e'a,,. e f�,s �� �. h�����,y.rSv 7�.* '3`��.,ya�AsP�S �,�s�' 2��,y„'`;r is "'t�y t 'G'' � �a��.�. /.`` i�` t��`'{U y•:a�.,'.�. z x"1,,`}}3�a R kE ^. y" as pt. KKtr?. +e w, a .. } x� "a" •i t 4 x 1�F. 4rT. # ao�r� i ���. .�„ { 't,. �.. ,�,F�,.�� a y:Y s$'?�Jay.y'c" .t 'i`r a S „•i � .�,a� ♦S} �,„�.�i .� P, r. a',Y' y4 � a7f�, alf��tJ'}�a�'.L vtjlt"t. `.� "':h � �� >, P �ri'.k•V .ly, � +rt�;*r ` zw_, ��, i!#.� pe t,"y+,ya7���,a}yt�'X r ;•%,' � `�..-8�m•c e•� a :� tr a .�k�:L fr � ,��tiw a,t�F'' a } `-+`'}. ��, Sa' �I5 !�ar :i ,fr5'�'� ',:•«a i�f a .L `r". 'r p �, fY,. 'tA tJ't' a„�.. 4� �.�•t. a„P't'y' t 3.� :'azf�'rYr C �ar,.�y ?• r.'�l' � ^i� '$`a�,. •� ;1 yti a f 1" a1 k :9 a- T °^t �•J ti •, r° TSf t+'W -ex e, 'v. b'� Llhlt 'a 175-53 03 'ro !'i;.aa �' s '4tr� `t7,� "9' y♦< •��� � ' ,} ;?•.:, H`'i' S{;�r a $ , w " t 16 25 Si Francis Uri Vn t1 sj �E�. 4t� ? rfi+'wv �•. ,^ ` ,'�..0 � �-`�'. "tY.w1 �*+?a A 1�+a�'p' �'.' °� G'.��.,��i .,.<j e S�'..3 y .x `�. �l. r .� ��} •�i. ����.+ t ,r s F,�id �A� -.;�. t: . s ,{y�am`,,� a _ cLt' � ����yy���� yT•j }�.a'±�'��'�,: � r L �. 2} t„Rr"4"' cp 4 ,�' a 'J,• y f ! f y F f 'iw. ,..,X+ ..x ih uyJ$t' .• `.y, t�,,'�a - ri@,,gga°���'tr% � 'S .�'s :c 1 � '" a'*w`• r e.i3. r «r`nh�� ��� q1r �:.. •; ,•a t •a `y �9'. ;,} J t t xr .,, r f }r�.* y't a . {K',% i •'� >�',ct ¢: �{e « c =� •S` { �f 4 'M "PITS, Wfli Ilk y.;Y`" 3' l�f..�• �: �/ �,���.; �I=J T`�.: t���. �� � ay L� Y L:�, `�I� -� ,, t .'k i ,� '4 t ✓Y.x`!`"�•-• �� v �0,>~ t` ��,.� � �.'" �, 1 `^�s% r 1 .:wr- `R';:3 rAwl, !te. "' ./l�,e�}i "� 7' .�N i $zh:� 1 �' ,$�'� :eJ a'�-sdy� •�•y�1 r}.x ��ci� � � '5.,.���,a�. i x � �+� d+ 'a 1 r e} , f � } *i .s'jS-• t ek, .. �s s - r•$., ' Sz,,t`•` st�`y--•a- r }5 S i° ; •+`M s. �"`ax 1 'b` !~ r}m,{,."i d.' .t'+ '�" •,r d`"�'"+x� e ,� at^��',tvj�`.�' ;A f `4 � u �t:a } '� } '+'+ � R... �-, �:q1, •* +, �.: y a +it. S k "`.f'� f V�rY''� V.4 �� �.. ..{• `�^ti �f �r y.C+.' .�• L�'.' "rad•".."`f �"�',�r` a�X ,�{� '. ,t,.t.;tr w�3� �_ F til, x t tw a <a N41 K,MV '' #'� �� tr, ? i „,.r�'{= � � .y�•. s ,;rcFi� < ;sj},��'uk�+*'� @� �� ,•. 4 iti' !.,?. r; � !^ ° •" a''.`�g u' � r * �'`�`��,�' Por �r •� .� '�,#..-. �'� t,�. .-�'S �ti k•���� �� Mi :��d�j�i �� �� 7 ary � ._fir 4 '�� '^aa� \1 � �•• Vq"•py�; !!.��: d q� .�i �' TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS PLANNING DEPARTMENT ATTACHMENT 26379 Fremont Road•Los Altos Hills, California 9.4022 •(650)941-7222•FAX(650)941-3 CEIVED . WORKSHEET #2 MAR EXISTING ANTD PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREA AND FLOOR AREA 200¢ • TURN IN WTTH YOUR TIWN OF APPLICATION LOS ALTOS Hit vo PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME 5CTQ PROPERTY ADDRESS of 6T CALCULATED BY 04111,0 © DATE 1. DEVELOPMENT AREA Existing Proposed Total i (SQUARE FOOTAGE) (Additions/Deletions) A. House and Garage(from Part 2.A.) �;1 + B. Decking JZ�N- Woo'p '9j-LG►c— 760 -760 C. Driveway and Parking (Measured 100'along centerline) D. Patios and Walkways 1 ) 3 3 157 E. Tennis Court F. Pool and Decking+5PP� J $ 12 (D G. Accessory Buildings (from Part B) H. Any other coverage TOTALS j n,'' 2 L Maximum Development Area Allowed-MDA(from Worksheet#1) 15, O+T 2. TOTAL IlVIPERVIOUS SURFACE Existing Proposed Total (SQUARE FOOTAGE) TOTALS t 6 9 01750 11 ) -71 3. FLOOR AREA (SQUARE FOOTAGE) Existing Proposed Total (Additions/Deletions) A. House and Garage a. 1st Floor b. 2nd Floor r c. Attic and Basement d. Garage � cARPofz:-t V B. Accessory Buildings a. 1st Floor b. 2nd Floor c. Attic and Basement TOTALS Maximum Floor Area Allowed-MFA (from Worksheet#1) Co,o l 5 TOWN USE ONLY CHECKED BY DATE 7J (o Zev.3/20/02 Pagel of 1 Town of Los Altos Hills ATTACHMENT January 28, 2004 Town of Los Altos Hills 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, CA 94022-2624 To Whom It May Concern: We reside at 26595 Ascension Drive,Los Altos Hills, next door to the Ammer-Spector residence at 26625 St. Francis Road,Los Altos Hills. We have reviewed the plans dated September 16, 2003 prepared by'Jenna Bayer Garden Design,Inc. and revised January 24,2004, proposing a new pool and pool deck on the Ammer-Spector property("Pool and Deck Plans"). We are aware that portions of the proposed new pool deck are over the setback on the side of the Ammer-Spector property that is adjacent to our property. We have no objection to the Pool and Deck Plans. We see no reason to stop the Ammer- Spector family from proceeding with their proposed project. Sincerely, -�Ta�f CG� Ralph Cowden Darlene Cowden C, ATrACHMENT ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN COMMITTEE LANDS CAP E/11ARDS CAPE EVALUATION OCT 2 0 Applicant's Name: T011 Address: Reviewed by: Lt-a- Date: l D 1 0 Mitigation needed: Visibility from off site: from distance (directions), from nearby neighbors (directions) (include need for screening for privacy). Noise: from pump/pool ---, air conditioner sport court Light: from fixtures automobile headlights Fence materials: color open/solid Erosion control Other: Planting Plan Evaluation: (Circle required trees and shrubs on plan) Are species appropriate: Deciduous? Future height (view, solar, drive/path blockage) Fire hazard Hardiness/frost Drought tolerance Meet mitigation needs Creeks and drainage: Is there a conservation easement? Are there sufficient protections in place. Will fences impact ,jildlife migration? Invapive species should not be planted near a waterway. Other: Are there obstructions to pathways, including future growth of plants? Are all noise mitigations in place? No construction in road right-of-way. X/ V