AgdaPkt 2013-09-23 Closed and Regular

Browse Search

8.A. - Page 450 SSL Ms. Silvia Vondarlinden A ..a April 16, 2013 L A W Page 4 FIRM 1. I. P regulations mean that the most likely weans of achieving a reduced floor area is not to finish the bottom level (the portion planned to be built on the slope) of each house. Therefore, the reduced floor area houses would have similar footprints to the larger houses. This limits any reduction of environmental impacts that may otherwise be achieved by smaller houses. For instance, there would be no reduction in impacts on slope stability, erosion, drainage, tree removal, and visual impacts. Amended Condition 19 still results in the development of 16 residences on the 16 subject lots and would therefore have substantially the same impacts with regard to such impact areas as air quality, traffic, and public services. The houses as proposed would not have any significant adverse impact on soil or hillside stability. Sound analysis and the resulting data are clear that the proposed development would not cause slope instability. In fact, the evidence in the record shows that the hillside will be more stable after development than it is now due to improved drainage, house foundations, street improvements, and grading requirements. As the street currently exists, the outside edge may slough down the hill because the soil and ground is not compacted. After construction, the ground will be compacted and stabilized, thereby improving the situation. Moreover, the home foundations will be in bedrock, which is not movable. Therefore, there is no basis to reduce house sizes in order to achieve greater hillside stability. To the extent that Amended Condition 19 means that the homes cannot feasibly be constructed, it jeopardizes hillside stability by preventing known measures from being implemented as the property owners develop their sites. In short, the house size restriction is not rationally related to the goals of reducing impacts on slope, stability, erosion, drainage, tree removal and visual impacts. Similarly, it is not rationally related to maintaining consistency with the surrounding neighborhood. Exhibit G shows photographs of a number of houses in the neighborhood. Many of these homes have a more imposing presence on the street front, and create more "bulk" than any of the LWJV proposed homes would have. In creating Amended Condition 19, the Planning Commission has applied an arbitrary limitation not articulated or permitted by the Zoning Code. The RH zone, in which the Project is located, permits much larger houses. For instance, as staff pointed out in their March 26, 2013 report to the Planning Commission, a residence with a floor area of about 9,300 square feet could be proposed under the RH Zone development regulations. See pages 3-4. As staff reported, the City's "General Plan and Zoning Code only provide limited guidance for mandating reductions in home size below the maximums..." (Page 4.), admitting that there is no basis in the City's law for limiting house sizes the way that the Planning Commission did. The Project seeks to construct houses that generally comply with or exceed the City's zoning regulations in the RH zone. The houses will not cover more than 40% of the entire lot, nor will more than 40% of the required rear yard be covered by accessory buildings. The houses will comply with the 25 -foot rear yard setback. They will maintain 60% lot coverage with pervious area, where only 40% is required by the Zoning Code. They will have at least 60% of the front yard area in pervious surfaces, and narrow lots less than 50 feet in average width will have a maximum width of 20 feet devoted to driveway and parking. The only zoning {2369-00021)0312193;3}