TO:
Design Review BoardFROM:
Brian Lynch, Associate PlannerSUBJECT:
7 Juno Road; file #20230Site plan and architectural review for an addition to an existing single-family residence, with a variance for reduced side yard setback.
MEETING DATE
: October 17, 2002 REVIEWED BY: DMW. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
PROJECT DATA:
Applicant/Owner: Mr. and Mrs. David Rose
Architect: Edward Hageman
Address: 7 Juno Road
Assessor Parcel Number: 034-272-32
File Number: 20230
Lot Size: 7,316 square feet
Zoning: R-1 (single-family residential)
General Plan: M-H (medium-high density residential)
Flood Zone: C
Date Complete: September 19, 2002
CEQA Exemption: October 17, 2002
Permit Streamlining
Act Deadline: December 16, 2002
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
This proposal is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as specified in Section 15303(e).
PROPOSAL:
The applicant has submitted a request to construct an addition to a single-family residence located at 7 Juno Road. The subject property is a triangularly shaped property near the corner of Mercury Avenue and Juno Road, in the Belveron neighborhood. The existing home is located towards the front setback line, which is the wider portion of the lot. The proposed addition would be located on the front of the existing house, on the right side. The proposed plan would create a larger master bedroom. The addition would remain on the ground level, and the existing height of the structure would be maintained.
The existing home is approximately 1,429 square feet in size, and the addition would add approximately 236 square feet, for a total of 1,665 square feet. The project would remain within the limits for lot coverage and floor area. However, the proposed addition would encroach on the required setback on the right side of the property by 2 feet. Therefore the applicant is requesting a variance for reduced side yard setback (6 feet in lieu of the standard 8 feet)
ANALYSIS:
Zoning
Except for the above mentioned variance request for reduced side yard setback, the project appears to be in conformance with all of the development regulations of the R-1 zoning district.
Design Issues
The proposed addition would bring the structure closer to the street than some of the other homes in the vicinity, possibly creating a sense of inconsistency in the neighborhood. However, the addition is very minor in scope, and would maintain the architectural style that is prevalent in the area. The basic floor plan of the home would also be maintained, lessening the intrusiveness of the addition. Moreover, the property is well screened with vegetation, and there would be no significant view or privacy impacts on adjacent properties.
The materials of the addition would be consistent with the existing structure. Staff does not foresee any concerns with the design of the project.
Variance
In order to grant the requested variance, the Board must make the following findings as required by Section 4.03.05 of the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance:
1. Because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of this Ordinance will deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and in the same or similar zones.
The subject property has an unusual shape, which limits the areas that the applicant can construct improvements. The proposed location of the addition is aesthetic architecturally, and creates a functional floor plan. Many of the properties in the vicinity could achieve these goals without the need for a variance because the surrounding lots have a typical rectangular shape.
2. The variance will not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitation upon other properties in the vicinity and in the same or similar zones.
According to the Town’s records, several properties in the immediate vicinity have been granted similar or greater variance requests. Approving the requested variances would not constitute a grant of special privilege to the applicant.
3. The strict application of this Ordinance would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship.
The existing side yard setbacks for the residence, which are the same as when the property was first developed, are 5’-8" feet on the left side, and 6’ on the right side. Strict application of the Zoning Ordinance would require that that the proposed addition is offset two feet from the existing wall of the structure. It would be possible to design the addition to comply with the setback requirement, but the design would be awkward and visually inconsistent with homes in the vicinity.
4. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other properties in the vicinity.
The proposed addition is minor in scale and would keep the home in conformance with others in the vicinity. Therefore the granting of the variance would not be detrimental to other properties in the vicinity.
Public Comment
To date, no public comment has been received regarding the revised application.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Board review this project with respect to Zoning Ordinance Sections 4.02.07 and 4.03.05 (Guiding Principles, and Variance Findings by Acting Body). If the Board finds that the design of the project is consistent with the Guiding Principles for Site Plan and Architectural Review, and all necessary findings can be made for the variance for reduced side yard setback, then it is recommended that the project be approved with the attached Conditions of Approval.
EXHIBITS:
Conditions of Approval
Application and supplemental materials dated September 9, 2002
Revised plans prepared for the project
EXHIBIT 1
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
7 Juno Road
FILE #20230
This approval shall be used within 3 years of the approval date, and shall become null and void unless a building permit has been issued.
The development of this project shall conform to the application received by the Town of Tiburon on July 15, 2002, or as amended by these conditions of approval. Any modifications to the approved plans must receive further design review and approvals.
All skylights shall be bronzed or tinted in a non-reflective manner, and no lights shall be placed in the wells.
All exterior lighting fixtures other than those approved by the Design Review Board must be down-light type fixtures.
Plans submitted to the Building Department for plan check shall be identical to those approved by the Design Review Board. If any changes are made to the approved Design Review plans, the permit holder is responsible for clearly identifying all such changes when submitted to the Building Department for plan check. Such changes must be clearly highlighted (with a "bubble" or "cloud") on the submitted plans. A list describing in detail all such changes shall be submitted and attached to the building plans, with a signature block to be signed by the Design Review Staff member indicating that these changes have been reviewed and are approved, or require additional Design Review. All changes that have not been explicitly approved by Staff as part of the Building Plan Check process are not approved. Construction that does not have Design Review approval is not valid and shall be subject to stop work orders and may require removal.