TO:
DESIGN REVIEW BOARDFROM:
BRIAN LYNCH, ASSOCIATE PLANNERSUBJECT:
2280 MAR EAST STREET; FILE #20306SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A DECK, WITH A VARIANCE FOR REDUCED SIDE YARD SETBACK.
MEETING DATE
: May 1, 2003 REVIEWED BY: DMW. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
PROJECT DATA:
OWNER: CHARLES AND MIK FLYNN
ADDRESS: 2280 MAR EAST STREET
ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER: 059-194-67
FILE NUMBER: 20306
LOT SIZE: 10,371 SQUARE FEET
ZONING: R-2 (TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)
GENERAL PLAN: H (HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)
FLOOD ZONE: C
DATE COMPLETE: MARCH 29, 2003
CEQA EXEMPTION: MAY 1, 2003
PERMIT STREAMLINING
ACT DEADLINE: JUNE 30, 2003
PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
Town Planning Division Staff has made a preliminary determination that this proposal would be exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as specified in Section 15303.
BACKGROUND:
On April 17, 2003, the applicant presented to the Design Review Board an application for an extension to an exterior deck on the west side of the residence at 2280 Mar East Street. The Board discussed the project, and in summary, the Board felt that the proposed deck was too large for the proposed use as an access/maintenance catwalk. The Board also felt that there was not enough information for the appropriate decision to be made. The public hearing was continued to the next Board meeting so the applicant could provide additional details on the proposed deck and associated guardrail.
PROPOSAL:
The applicant is maintaining a request to construct an extension to an exterior deck and guardrail on the west side of the residence. The applicant has stated that the deck would act as a catwalk and provide the only reasonable access to the west side of the residence. The applicant is also requesting approval to increase the height of the clear glass guardrail to be located on the southwest corner of the deck from three feet to six feet. The line of the guardrail would be adjusted to enclose the proposed deck.
The applicant has slightly modified the application by reducing the deck to four feet wide instead of the originally proposed five feet wide. The applicant has also submitted more details on the deck installation, and the location and height of the associated guardrail. All new information has been attached for reference.
ANALYSIS:
Zoning
Except for the above mentioned variance request for reduced side yard setback, the project appears to be in conformance with the remaining development regulations of the R-2 zoning district.
Design Issues
As discussed in the staff report dated April 17, 2003, Planning Division staff maintains that there does not appear to be any significant design issues with the proposed deck. However, the proposal to increase the height of the glass railing could have adverse impacts on the view from the adjacent residence. Staff recommends that the Board consider these potential view impacts.
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:
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 parcel is partially located below the mean high tide line of the San Francisco Bay. The property is steep and not easily accessible, except from the residence and surrounding decks. This special circumstance deprives the applicant of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity. The proposed deck would relieve the burden of site inaccessibility.
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 variance would not constitute a grant of special privilege to the applicant.
The strict application of this Ordinance would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship.
The strict application of the ordinance would result in a deck that would be significantly narrower and shorter, and would not provide the same access the proposed deck would. Not having adequate access to the west side of the residence would be an unnecessary hardship for the applicant.
The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other properties in the vicinity.
As proposed, the deck would not result in significant privacy or aesthetic impacts detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other properties in the vicinity.
Public Comment
The applicant has submitted a letter describing the purposes of the project.
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) and determine that the project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as specified in Section 15303. 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.
Letter submitted by applicant.
Revised plans for the project.
EXHIBIT 1
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
2280 Mar East Street
FILE #20306
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 March 24 2003, or as amended by these conditions of approval. Any modifications to the approved plans must receive further design review and approvals.
All necessary permits from the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) shall be obtained prior to the issuance of a building permit.
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.