2732 stuart street - berkeley, california · 2016-10-06 · 2732 stuart street use permit...

Z O N I N G

A D J U S T M E N T S

B O A R D

S t a f f R e p o r t

2120 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981.7410 TDD: 510.981.7474 Fax: 510.981.7420

E-mail: [email protected]

FOR BOARD ACTION OCTOBER 13, 2016

2732 Stuart Street

Use Permit #ZP2015-0248 to construct a 307 square-foot, second-story addition on a lot that exceeds maximum allowed lot coverage. The project would increase the size of the dwelling unit from 1,873 square feet to 2,450 square feet and the number of bedrooms from two to four.

I. Background

A. Land Use Designations: General Plan: Low Medium Density Residential Zoning: R-2, Restricted Two-Family Residential

B. Zoning Permits Required:

• Use Permit with Public Hearing, under Berkeley Municipal Code (BMC) Section 23C.04.070.C, to enlarge a building that is non-conforming by reason of violation of the maximum allowable lot coverage;

• Administrative Use Permit, under BMC Section 23C.04.070.B, to alter a portion of the building which encroaches into the non-conforming front yard setback;

• Administrative Use Permit, under BMC Section 23C.04.070.B, to alter a portion of the building which encroaches into the non-conforming rear yard setback; and

• Administrative Use Permit, under BMC Section 23D.28.070.C, to construct an addition greater than 14 feet in average height.

C. CEQA Determination: Categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15301 (“Existing Facilities”) and Section 15303 (“New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures”) of the CEQA Guidelines.

D. Parties Involved:

Applicant: Glen Jarvis, Jarvis Architects 5278 College Avenue, Oakland CA 94618-1415

Property Owner: David Show 2732 Stuart Street, Berkeley CA 94705

2732 STUART STREET ZONING ADJUSTMENTS BOARD of 12 October 13, 2016

File: \\cobnas1\Planning$\LANDUSE\Projects by Address\Stuart\2732\ZP2015-0248\Document Finals\ZAB October 13, 2016\2016-10-13_ZAB_SR_2732 Stuart.docx

Figure 1: Zoning Map

Figure 2: Aerial Map

Subject

Property

ZONING ADJUSTMENTS BOARD 2732 STUART STREET October 13, 2016 of 12

Figure 3: Proposed Site Plan

Proposed Second-Story

addition

Proposed Second-Story

Deck



Figure 4: Existing and Proposed North Elevations Figure 5: Existing and Proposed South Elevations Figure 6: Existing and Proposed East Elevations

Basement Addition

Basement Addition


Table 1: Land Use Information

Location Existing Use Zoning District General Plan Designation

Subject Property Single Family Residence

Restricted Two-Family Residential

(R-2)

Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR)

Surrounding Properties

North

Single Family Residences, primarily two-stories in height

South

East

West

Table 2: Special Characteristics

Characteristic Applies to Project?

Explanation

Creeks No The project site is not within a creek buffer.

Historic Resources

No

On June, 2015, the applicant submitted the Department of Parks and Recreation Primary Record (DPR) Forms 523A & B. According to the DPR forms, the existing residence was constructed in 1909 and the attached garage was constructed in 1923. Later additions on the rear included a bay at the kitchen and an enclosed deck with stairs to the yard. The existing dwelling consists of a Craftsman bungalow. According to the DPR form, the residence did not directly contribute to any significant historic events or trends is not the work of a master architect or builder, and there is no evidence to suggest that the previous property owners were considered important to history, or that the site may yield important information about prehistory or history. The project was referred to the Landmarks Preservation Commission Staff (LPC) for comment. The LPC Staff did not identify the existing residence as an historic resource. Therefore, the project would not affect an historic building.

Seismic Hazards Mapping Act (Liquefaction, Fault-rupture, Landslide)

No

The project site is not located within an area susceptible to Liquefaction, Fault-rupture, or Landslide, as shown on the State Seismic Hazard Zones map. In addition, no excavation or other ground disturbance are proposed for this development.

Soil/Groundwater Contamination

No The project site is not located in the City’s Hazards Management Area. In addition, no ground disturbance is proposed.

Table 3: Project Chronology

Date Action

November 30, 2015 Application submitted

December 22, 2015 Incompleteness letter issued

January 28, 2016 Application resubmitted

February 25, 2016 Second Incompleteness letter issued

March 17, 2016 Application Resubmitted

April 15, 2016 Application Deemed Complete

September 29, 2016 Public hearing notices mailed/posted

October 13, 2016 ZAB Hearing on project



Table 4: Development Standards

Standard BMC Sections 23D.28.070-080

Existing Proposed Total Permitted/ Required

Lot Area (sq. ft.) 2,560 No Change 5,000 min.

Gross Floor Area (sq. ft.) 1 1,873 2,450

(addition of 577 sf) N/A

Dwelling Units 1 No Change 1 max.

Bedroom 2 4 4

(without AUP or UPPH)

Building Height

Maximum 27’-7” 29’-7” N/A

Average 26’ 27’ 28’

Stories 2 No Change 3 max.

Building Setbacks

Front (Stuart) 5’-3” No Change 20’ min.

Rear 10’ No Change 20’ min.

East Side 1’-9” No Change 4’ min.

West Side 2’-8” No Change 4’ min.

Usable Open Space (sq. ft.) 302 No Change 400 min.

Lot Coverage 55% 55% 40 max.

Parking (Auto) 1 1 1 min. 1. Per BMC Section 23F.04.010, the calculated gross floor area for the project does not include an attached one-car garage.

II. Project Setting

A. Neighborhood/Area Description: The subject site is located on the south side of Stuart Street between Piedmont Avenue and Cherry Street. The neighborhood consists of a mix of single- and multiple-family dwellings ranging from duplexes to apartment buildings. All confronting (north) properties are developed with two- and three-story multi-family dwellings while the abutting properties (east, west and south) are developed with two-story, single-family dwellings. Many of the abutting and confronting lots are substandard and, due to the size and location of the dwellings, are lawfully non-conforming due to lot coverage, density and setbacks.

B. Site Conditions: The site is rectangular in shape and generally flat. It is developed with a two-story, 1,873 square foot, single-family dwelling unit. The dwelling has a partially conditioned basement and an attached one-car garage. As detailed in Table 4, the building is non-conforming for front, rear, side yard setbacks, usable open space and maximum lot coverage.

III. Project Description The proposed project would (1) expand a lawfully non-conforming single-family residence by constructing a 307 square-foot second-story addition that would vertically extend a non-conforming 16-foot, 3-inch front yard setback and (2) expand an existing basement by 290 square feet that is partially in a non-conforming 10-foot rear yard setback and to excavate to lower the floor. The second-story addition would provide a master bedroom and a bathroom. The existing basement with only an approximately 6-foot floor-to-ceiling clearance would be expanded by lowering the floor and by excavating to create an larger basement with a full ceiling height of 8 feet. The basement expansion would add 290


square feet of habitable space and would consist of a bathroom, a laundry room and a bedroom. It would be internally connected to the floor area above and would also have direct access to the rear yard via a new patio that would be below the existing grade of the rear yard. The proposed project would also remove an existing rear deck. Partial removal of the rear deck would result in reduction in lot coverage by five percent. The addition would continue the architectural character of the existing house with hipped rooflines, compatible wood shingle siding, and compatible windows.

IV. Community Discussion A. Neighbor/Community Concerns: Prior to submittal of the application on November

30, 2015, the applicant installed a pre-application poster and contacted surrounding residences to obtain signatures. In signing the plans, two neighbors stated objections to the project, citing concerns about privacy, shading, and the scale of development. Shortly after submittal, the City received multiple e-mails from abutting neighbors at 2800 and 2804 Piedmont Avenue. The neighbor at 2800 Piedmont Avenue asked that staff respond to the following request for clarification:

Would proximity of the second floor addition to the property line preclude a

similar addition to their property; How the City calculates the allowable lot coverage and usable open space; and Parking and use of the garage as habitable space.

Staff responded by pointing out that (1) the proposed second-story addition complies with the district minimum side yard setback; (2) the building separation requirements apply to buildings on the same parcel and the proposed second-story addition would not preclude them from constructing a similar addition to their property; (3) the City considers all the area of a lot, as projected on a horizontal plane, which is enclosed by the exterior walls of buildings or enclosed accessory structures; or covered by decks, porches, stairs and/or landings which cover an enclosed space or paved ground area; (4) usable open space is an outdoor space with a minimum width and length of ten feet and less than 8% slope. Also, balconies with minimum width and length of six feet and with at least one exterior side open and unobstructed also qualify as open space. Because the second-story addition would occur within an existing building footprint, the lot coverage and usable open space would not be further reduced. Removal of an enclosed deck with paved area would result in reduction of lot coverage but not in usable open space; and (5) the garage would remain a garage and staff has added a condition of approval to require that the garage to remain open for automobile parking. The neighbor at 2804 Piedmont Avenue also raised concerns related to light, air and privacy, but they did not elaborate. All communications are provided as Attachment 3 to this Staff report. On September 29, 2016, the City mailed 244 notices to adjoining property owners and occupants, and to interested neighborhood organizations and posted the public notice



at and around the project site in three locations. At the time of this writing, staff has not received additional communications regarding the project.

B. Landmarks Preservation Commission/Design Review Committee Review: None required.

V. Issues and Analysis A. Expansion of a building that is non-conforming for lot coverage, setbacks, and

usable open space: The BMC (Chapter 23C.04, Conforming and Non-Conforming Uses, Buildings and Lots) allows for the type of alteration/expansions proposed by the applicant through issuance of use permits, as long as the proposed changes would not exacerbate the non-conforming conditions, i.e. further exceed ordinance limits for maximum lot coverage, or minimum rear and front yard setbacks. Staff believes the required use permit findings could be made as discussed below.

1. Lot Coverage: The project site is non-conforming for maximum lot coverage.

Because the proposed second story addition and expansion of the existing basement would increase the building footprint, and would not further increase the non-conforming lot coverage, Staff believes the proposed building expansion satisfies the regulatory requirement of BMC Section 23C.04.070.C and, therefore, can be approved. Additionally, Staff notes the project would remove an enclosed deck with paved area that contributes to the site’s exceedance for lot coverage, and that the removal would reduce the existing lot coverage from 55% to 50%, which would bring the property closer to compliance.1

Because the proposal satisfies the regulatory criterion for expansion of a property with non-conforming lot coverage, and because the proposed expansion would not result in significant impacts to light, privacy, air and views for the abutting residences as described in detail below (see Section V.B of this report), staff recommends that the Board consider this request favorably.

2. Non-Conforming Front Setback: The project would expand the existing second

floor, which is partially within the required front yard setback. The existing distance of the building from the front (northern) property line along Stuart Street varies from as little as 5 feet and 3 inches at the northwest corner to approximately 16 feet 3 inches at the southeast corner where a minimum of 20 feet is required by the R-2 Zoning District. There would be no impact to the confronting properties to the north because those properties are separated by the 60 foot public right-of-way (Stuart Street) and by additional on-site front yard setbacks on both sides of Stuart Street. Additionally, because the proposed second-story addition meets the required side yard setback of 4 feet, and because the average height of the addition would be approximately 27 feet where 28 feet is permitted, Staff believes that the design is responsive to the purposes of the R-2 Zoning District related to protecting adjacent

1 Per BMC Section 23F.04.010 (Definitions), lot coverage is “All the area of a lot, as projected on a horizontal plane, which is enclosed by the exterior walls of buildings or enclosed Accessory Structures; or covered by decks, porches, stairs and/or landings which cover an enclosed space or paved ground area.”


properties from unreasonable obstructions of light and air. Staff believes the ZAB can make the finding to approve this permit.

3. Non-Conforming Rear Setback: The project would expand the existing basement

which is partially within the required rear yard setback. Approximately 85 square feet of the new basement area would occur within the existing lawfully non-conforming rear yard setback (10 feet one inch where a minimum of 20 feet is required). Because the project would excavate to convert existing crawl space into full-height basement with a floor-to-ceiling clearance of 8 feet, and would not further reduce the existing non-conforming rear yard setback, Staff believes the ZAB can make the finding to approve this permit.

4. Usable Open Space: The existing building is non-conforming for usable open

space. Under current zoning, the existing single-family dwelling would require 400 square feet of usable open space; however, the site only provides 302 square feet. This usable open space is in the form of a patio in the rear yard. As proposed, the second-story addition would not further reduce the existing usable open space.

B. Light, Privacy, Air & Views: The proposed second-story addition requires an

Administrative Use Permit because the addition and alterations are greater than 14 feet in average height (Section 23D.28.070). Project’s impact to adjacent properties is discussed below: 1. Shade/Shadow: The applicant prepared a shadow study for the proposed project

showing existing and proposed conditions in June and December. Shadow studies are summarized below:

No shadow impacts would occur to confronting dwelling units on the north (along Stuart Street) because these properties are separated by a 60 foot wide public right-of-way and front yard setbacks along both sides of the street;

New shadows would be cast to the west, but the new shading would not impact the abutting dwelling unit to the west (2730 Stuart) because the proposed project would not alter the existing roofline adjacent to the property to the west; and

No new shadows would fall on dwellings to the south.

Shadow impacts to the adjacent property to the east, at 2800 Piedmont, are summarized below:

The west-facing kitchen and living room windows at the ground level are currently partially shaded during winter and summer afternoon months, and would be fully shaded during winter and summer afternoon months; and

No impacts to rooftop solar access (for the potential future installation of solar panels).

Although shadow conditions would increase on the aforementioned portions of property at 2800 Piedmont. The moderate increase in shading is consistent with what



is to be expected in an urbanized area, and is therefore found to reasonable and generally non-detrimental.

2. Privacy: The project could potentially affect the privacy of adjacent residences to

the south and east by introducing a second-story addition that places windows facing these properties. The neighbors to the east at 2800 and to the south 2804 Piedmont have expressed concerns about the project’s impacts on privacy, as second-story windows and new balcony would overlook their residences. Regarding potential impacts to 2800 Piedmont, Staff notes the proposed second-story addition would comply with the required 4 feet side yard setback and the proposed windows on the second-story east elevation would occur in the new master bedroom and would not directly face any opening at the adjacent property to the east (2800 Piedmont). Regarding potential impacts to 2804 Piedmont, Staff notes the proposed windows and balcony on the south elevation would comply with the required 20 feet rear yard setback, and views from the new balcony addition, measuring approximately 15 feet in average height and accessible only from the proposed second-story addition, would be limited to the to the east and south. Additionally, fencing along the common property lines would prevent a loss of privacy at ground level.

In the context of the R-2 District, where up to three-story buildings are allowed and these neighborhoods are a generally a mix of two- to three-story residences, any loss of privacy due to the project would be no greater than typical for urban setting. The proposed new second-story addition with a balcony would comply with the R-2 District standard for side and rear yard setbacks and would therefore be expected to achieve a reasonable building-to-building separation, which would also help ensure a reasonable expectation of privacy on each side.

3. Air: As discussed in V.A.2 and 3 above, the proposed addition would not further

reduce the existing lawfully non-conforming front or rear yard setbacks, and would not exacerbate the existing non-conforming lot coverage. The second-story addition would occur on the top of the existing single-story garage which maintains 16 feet and 3 inches front yard setback where 20 feet is required, and the addition would also be setback to meet the required 4 feet side yard setback, consistent with the R-2 District requirements. Therefore, the project would ensure adequate air between the subject parcel and adjacent properties and would not further reduce the existing lack of air between the subject building and the adjacent property to the east.

4. Views: Due to the relatively flat slope of this neighborhood and its low elevation

above sea level, views of significant features are not generally available. North-facing windows in the area may provide partially obstructed views of the East Bay Hills, especially from two-story residences, as screened by intervening buildings and trees. Although the project could further obstruct views of the East Bay Hills from nearby two-story structures, such views are already partially obstructed and would not be substantially degraded.


C. Administrative Use Permit for an Addition over 14-feet: The R-2 District allows residential additions above 14 feet in average height up to 28 feet in average height with an Administrative Use Permit (BMC Section 23D.28.070). The proposed project would expand the existing second-story and would increase the average height of the building from 26 feet to 27 feet, which would be within the R-2 District allowed average height limit. In Staff’s view, the addition would be consistent with the adjacent residential properties, and properties in the vicinity. Further, as discussed above, the height of the proposed addition does not create significant impacts to sunlight, air, or views and does not further reduce the existing non-conforming lot coverage, usable open space, front and rear yard setbacks.

D. General Plan Consistency: The 2002 General Plan contains several policies applicable to the project, including the following: 1. Policy LU-3–Infill Development: Encourage infill development that is architecturally

and environmentally sensitive, embodies principles of sustainable planning and construction, and is compatible with neighboring land uses and architectural design and scale.

2. Policy LU-7–Neighborhood Quality of Life, Action A: Require that new development be consistent with zoning standards and compatible with the scale, historic character, and surrounding uses in the area.

3. Policy UD-16–Context: The design and scale of new or remodeled buildings should respect the built environment in the area, particularly where the character of the built environment is largely defined by an aggregation of historically and architecturally significant buildings.

4. Policy UD-24–Area Character: Regulate new construction and alterations to ensure that they are truly compatible with and, where feasible, reinforce the desirable design characteristics of the particular area they are in.

5. Policy UD-32–Shadows: New buildings should be designed to minimize impacts on solar access and minimize detrimental shadows.

Staff Analysis: As discussed above, the project would not substantially block views or create significant impacts on the privacy of adjacent neighbors. The proposed second story addition occurs within the existing footprint and removal of deck would result in reduction in the degree of the non-conforming lot coverage for the site. The alterations to the roof allow the building to expand without increasing the non-conforming nature of the site. Additionally, the project is consistent with the design character of other buildings in the vicinity.

VI. Recommendation

Because of the project’s consistency with the Zoning Ordinance and General, and its minimal impact on surrounding properties, Staff recommends that the Zoning Adjustments Board APPROVE Use Permit #ZP2015-0248 pursuant to BMC Section 23B.32.030, and subject to the attached Findings and Conditions (see Attachment 1).

Attachments:



1. Findings and Conditions 2. Revised Project Plans and Applicant Statement, received March 17, 2016 3. Recent Correspondences 4. Notice of Public Hearing, dated September 29, 2016 Staff Planner: Immanuel Bereket, Associate Planner, [email protected], (510) 981-7425

mailto:[email protected]

2732 stuart street - berkeley, california · 2016-10-06 · 2732 stuart street use permit...

Documents