SUPPLEMENTAL
INFORMATION
X
Honorable Chair and Members of the Hermosa Beach Planning Commission
Regular Meeting of March 15, 2022
Title
HLE 21-02, CUP 22-01, PDP 22-01, VTPM #83472 - A request for a height limit exception to allow a new two-unit condominium project to exceed the maximum allowable height of 30’-0” in the R-3 Residential Zone and Conditional Use Permit, Precise Development Plan and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 83472 for a two-unit attached condominium project at 125 1st Court and to determine the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Applicant/Owner: MAL Hermosa LLC
Anatoly Ioda
1012 Garnet St
Redondo Beach, CA 90277
Recommended Action:
Recommendation
Staff recommends the Planning Commission:
1. Adopt Resolution No. 22-XX approving a Height Limit Exception for a new two-unit condominium and allowing the project to exceed the maximum allowable height to 30’-0”
2. Adopt Resolution No. 22-XX approving the Conditional Use Permit, Precise Development Plan and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 83472 for a two-unit attached condominium project at 125 1st Court, subject to conditions, and
3. Determine the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Body
Background:
GENERAL PLAN: High Density Residential (HD)
ZONING: Multiple-Family Residential (R-3)
LOT SIZE: 2,849.48 square feet
PROPOSED SQUARE FOOTAGE: UNIT A: 2,113 square feet
UNIT B: 2,018 square feet
EXISTING SQUARE FOOTAGE: UNIT A: 857 square feet
UNIT B: 554 square feet
EXISTING BUILDING HEIGHT: 11’-6” (Approximately)
PROPOSED BUILDING HEIGHT: 34’-9” to 32’-7” (Approximately)
PARKING REQUIRED: 4 Standard spaces/1 Guest space
EXISTING PARKING: 2 Standard spaces
PARKING PROVIDED: 4 Standard spaces/3 Guest space
ON STREET PARKING LOST/GAINED: 1 Lost/4 Gained
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: CEQA Section 15303(b)
(Class 3 Exemption, New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures)
Subject Site
The subject site is located in the Sand Section in the southern portion of the City. The subject site is located on a through lot between 1st Street and 1st Court. The subject site measures 2,849.48 square feet and is currently developed with two units that are proposed to be demolished. The subject site is bounded by Multiple-Family Residential (R-3) zoned properties to north, west, and east, and Residential-Professional (R-P) zoned properties to the south. The surrounding residential neighborhood is comprised of multi-family and single-family developments. The subject site 50 feet away from commercial properties along Hermosa Avenue in the C-1 Limited Business and Residential Zone.
Proposed Project
The project proposes to demolish two existing dwellings and a garage to construct a new two-unit attached condominium project.
Both units (A and B) are designed as a three-story condominium with main entries located on the east side of the building. Both units contain a two-car garage with laundry, and entry hall, a guest bedroom and bathroom on the first floor; three bedrooms, and two bathrooms on the second floor; a kitchen, dining room, living area, bathroom, and deck on the third floor; and access to the roof deck above the third floor.
The two-unit condominium project is proposed to exceed the maximum allowable height in the R-3 zone and is requesting a height exception pursuant to Hermosa Beach Municipal Code Subsections 17.16.020 (B)-(C). The project would have a maximum height of 31’-0” to the east and a maximum of 33’-0” to the west as the property slopes to the west.
Height Limit Exception in Hermosa Beach Municipal Code (HBMC)
Pursuant to HBMC Section 17.16.020(A), the maximum building height in the R-3 zone is 30’-0”. The HBMC states the intent and purpose of the height section is to set a standard height limit for most projects in scale with existing development and to minimize view obstruction. However, to recognize that pre-existing development in some neighborhoods and/or clusters of lots are already predominately built higher that than the height limit, the height section also allows some projects to exceed the height limit to enable property owners to enjoy the same rights to view, sunlight and air enjoyed by those property owners with the higher buildings. The height section further sets forth conditions and design criteria for determining whether a project is allowed to exceed the height limit.
Pursuant to HBMC Section 17.16.020(B), the Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing and may grant or conditionally grant an exception to allow a multiple- or single-family building to exceed 30’-0” in height up to a maximum of 35’-0” in height when all of the following conditions are met to the satisfaction of the Planning Commission (subject to appeal to the City Council pursuant to HBMC Section 17.58.040):
1. An extension above the height limit is necessary to take advantage of a scenic view over surrounding structures which are already constructed above thirty (30) feet in height. Said structures already in excess of thirty (30) feet would otherwise significantly obstruct the proposed project’s view potential.
2. The proposed development is located between, and adjacent to, two (2) or more contiguous lots with buildings constructed in excess of the thirty (30) foot height limit;
3. The structural extension above thirty (30) feet will not adversely impact the available views, and access to sunlight and air of adjacent and surrounding properties;
4. If all the above conditions are satisfied, the following design features of the portion of the building above thirty (30) feet shall also be considered by the planning commission to determine if an exception should be granted:
a. The style and pitch of the roof,
b. The mass and bulk of the proposed structure above thirty (30) feet (in order to minimize bulk of the upper floor),
c. The architectural appearance, as exhibited by the type, style, and shape of the structure and the proposed exterior materials.
R-3 Building Height Municipal Code History
|
Date |
Ordinance |
Description |
|
February 20, 1973 |
Ordinance No. N.S. 443 |
Established a maximum building height of 35’-0.” |
|
October 28, 1992 |
Ordinance No. 92-1074 |
Established a maximum building height of 30’-0.” Established Section 601 B. regarding height exceptions in the R-3 and R-P zones. |
|
November 9, 1995 |
Ordinance No. 95-1136 |
Amended Section 601 B. to require proposed developments be located between, and adjacent to, two or more contiguous lots with buildings in excess of thirty (3) foot height limits. Amended Section 601C. to require topographical surveys and spot elevations of existing buildings for determining if existing building on adjacent lots exceed 30’-0.” |
Height Limit Exception Cases
Previous Planning Commission Actions
|
Meeting Date |
Description |
|
March 16, 1993 (Approved) |
341 Monterey Boulevard - To allow greater than 30’ height in the R-3 Zone |
|
March 15, 1994 (Approved) |
1120 Loma Drive -- To allow a new apartment to exceed 30’ height limit |
|
February 21, 1995(Approved) |
132 Manhattan Avenue/133 Bayview Dr -- CUP, V.T.P.M.#24208 & PDP for a 2-unit condo; height limit exception to allow >30’ in height in R-3 zone |
|
May 16, 1995(Approved), reconsidered by the City Council June 27, 1995 |
632 Monterey Blvd. -- CUP, V.T.P.M.#24276 & PDP for a 2-unit condo; height limit exception to allow >30’ in height in R-3 zone |
|
June 20, 2000 (Approved) |
1411 Manhattan Avenue & 1410 Palm Drive -- CUP, PDP & V.T.P.M.#25768 for a 2-unit condo and a height limit exception to allow a 35’ building height pursuant to Section 17.16.020. |
|
June 17, 2003 (Approved) |
321 Monterey Blvd. - A height limit exception to allow a 35’ building height for a proposed Single-Family Residence pursuant to section 17.16.020 |
|
July 19, 2011 (Denied) |
623 Monterey Blvd-To allow construction of a new roof deck exceeding the 30-foot height limit on the R-3 Zone |
|
September 21, 2021 (Denied) |
611 Monterey Blvd-Height Limit Exception for a new 3-story SFR w/ basement level and JADU. |
Analysis for the Height Exception
Existing Neighborhood Characteristics
The subject site is located adjacent to property addressed as 122 1st Street/ 60 1st Street to the west and 132 1st Street to the east. According to the survey submitted by the applicant, the structure at 132 1st Street is built to a height of approximately 32’-1”. City records show a building permit for this address was approved in 1991, prior to the 30’-0” height limit requirement in the R-3 Zone.
The property located at 122 1st Street/ 60 Palm Drive exceeds the maximum allowable height and is built to a height of approximately 33’-6 ¼”. City records show this property was built in approximately 1902.
The subject site is also adjacent to the condominium properties at 101-103 Manhattan Avenue to the north. The properties at 101- 103 Manhattan Avenue were built with a maximum building height of 35’-0” at its highest point. City records show this development was built in 1987 prior to the 30’-0” height limit requirement in the R-3 Zone.
While the Planning Commission has not considered a height exception case on 1st Street or 1st Court, this does not indicate that a height exception is warranted or not on this property, rather it indicates that properties may not have been redeveloped on this street or that property owners have not applied for the exception.
Of the 13 properties located on the south side of 1st Street, two properties, directly adjacent to the subject site, exceed the required 30’-0” height requirement.
Proposed Project Height
The applicant proposes to build a two-unit condominium project consisting of three bedrooms and three and a half bathrooms each. As proposed, portions of the roof and roof deck railing are proposed to exceed the maximum height of 30’-0.”
According to the applicant’s justification document (Attachment 3), the request to exceed the maximum allowable building height of 30’-0” is to:
• Take advantage of the primary scenic view of the Pacific Ocean.
• Consider the location of the neighbors’ openings and reacts by placing glazing outside the neighbors’ line of sight, maximizing privacy for both properties.
• Consider and not obstruct views of neighboring properties.
• Minimize subterranean construction that may result in environmental and safety issues and to protect the City’s water table.
• Create a design that would both complement and improve the aesthetics of 1st Street and 1st Court.
The applicant’s reasons for pursuing the height exception reference the need for additional height to take advantage of a scenic view over surrounding structures that are already built over the required 30’-0” while maintaining the views, quality of life, and privacy of adjacent properties. The subject site is located adjacent to two contiguous lots, both of which exceed the height limit and have the potential to obstruct the proposed project’s scenic ocean view to the west.
Conditions for Granting the Height Limit Exception
The following is an analysis of whether findings can be made that the proposed project meets all the required conditions of HBMC 17.16.020 (B)-(C) for an exception to the height limit:
1. An extension above the height limit is necessary to take advantage of a scenic view over surrounding structures which are already constructed above thirty (30) feet in height. Said structures already in excess of thirty (30) feet would otherwise significantly obstruct the proposed project’s view potential;
Finding: The subject site is surrounded by properties that currently exceed the maximum allowable height of 30’-0”. In order to take advantage of the scenic coastal view (westerly view) over surrounding structures already in excess of 30’-0” an increase in height is necessary for the proposed project. Specifically, 122 1st Street, which is located to the west of the subject site, is constructed above the height limit, with the highest roof ridge elevation sitting at 33’-6 ¼”. The topographic survey identifies properties to the east and west that exceed the building height of 30’-0”. If the proposed project is built to the 30’-0” height limit, the property directly to the west is likely to obstruct the proposed project’s view potential since the scenic view potential is primarily oriented to the west. The applicant submitted renderings showing the potential obstruction of the scenic view in Attachment 3.
2. The proposed development is located between, and adjacent to, two (2) or more contiguous lots with buildings constructed in excess of the thirty (30) foot height limit;
Finding: The proposed development is located between, and adjacent to, two or more contiguous lots with buildings constructed in excess of the 30‘-0” height limit as demonstrated by submitted survey. The building located to the west is approximately 33’- 6 1/4” and the building to the east is approximately 33’-1 ½” and 32’-11” and as the property slopes from east to west. To the north properties at 101-103 Manhattan Avenue have a height of approximately 35’-0” at the highest point (Attachment 6).
3. The structural extension above thirty (30) feet will not adversely impact the available views, and access to sunlight and air of adjacent and surrounding properties;
Finding: The proposed project is designed with a maximum height of 33’-1 ½” and 32’-11” and as the property slopes from east to west in order to not block neighboring property views and access to sunlight and air. As proposed, the project would have a height elevation of 125.83 (one foot over the maximum allowed height on the eastern property line and 2’-6” over the allowed maximum height on the western property line. The closest elevation of the property directly east of the project (132 1st Street) sits at 127.58 (2’-11” over of the maximum allowed height). The maximum roof height of the proposed structure would sit approximately 2’-0” lower than the handrail height of the neighboring property. The proposed design of the project also considers the location of the neighbors’ (property at 132 1st Street) windows. No windows are proposed over the 30’ height limit as to not adversely impact the air quality or access to sunlight.
Properties at 123-147 Lyndon Street across the 1st Court alley in the Residential- Professional (R-P Zone) were developed after the 30’-0” height limit requirement and constructed in 1998. 125 Lydon Street, located directly across the alley from the proposed project was built to a height elevation of 122.73. For reference, the 1998 survey shows the northwestern property corner elevation 91.75 and the northeastern property corner elevation at 93.25. This is compared to the subject site’s southwest property corner elevation surveyed at 91.77 and the southeast property corner at 93.15. The highest proposed point off of 1st Court on the subject site is 125.83 (the max at the 30’-0” height requirement would be 123.45), approximately 2’-6” over the 30’-0” requirement. While it is important to note that the height exception only requires two contiguous lots be over the height requirement to be considered, neighboring properties and northern views could be impacted.
4. If all the above conditions are satisfied, the following design features of the portion of the building above thirty (30) feet shall also be considered by the planning commission to determine if an exception should be granted:
a. The style and pitch of the roof,
b. The mass and bulk of the proposed structure above thirty (30) feet (in order to minimize bulk of the upper floor),
c. The architectural appearance, as exhibited by the type, style, and shape of the structure and the proposed exterior materials.
Finding: The Planning Commission may consider the following in their determination:
• The style and pitch of the roof,
Both proposed roofs are shed style roofs that slope inward towards the center of the property. The design of the pitch of the roof is to minimize the amount of bulk above 30’-0” and to maximize the surface area for solar panels.
• The mass and bulk of the proposed structure above thirty (30) feet (in order to minimize bulk of the upper floor),
The mass and bulk of the proposed structure over 30’-0” consists of part of the roof structure and guardrails for the roof decks. The applicant originally proposed glass railing as to not further obstruct neighboring viewpoints however, in working with their neighbors it was proposed that they change to something less transparent to maintain privacy.
• The architectural appearance, as exhibited by the type, style, and shape of the structure and the proposed exterior materials.
The proposed project incorporates a contemporary architectural design for both units. Exterior finishes would consist of stucco, faux wood siding (vertical shiplap), glass, and aluminum.
Based on the evidence provided and reasons noted above, the applicant has demonstrated compliance with HBMC Section 17.16.020 (B)-(C) and all required findings can be made in support of the height exception. While Staff recommends approval of the height exception, should the Planning Commission make contrary findings, the application for a conditional use permit, precise development plan, and tentative parcel map can still be considered for further action pending a condition of approval (Condition of approval #2(a) of the draft Resolution - Attachment 2) to redesign the project to meet the 30’-0” height requirement of the R-3 Zone.
Analysis for the Proposed Condominium
Per HBMC Section 17.22.040, condominiums are subject to a Conditional Use Permit. In considering the granting of a Conditional Use Permit, general criteria for all uses shall be made pursuant to HBMC Section 17.40.020.
In addition, per HBMC Section 17.58.020, the construction or location of buildings or structures in any zone shall require submittal of plans for Planning Commission review and are subject to a Precise Development Plan.
Development Standards
The proposed project complies with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, including the R-3 zone and design standards for condominiums in HBMC Chapter 17.22.
|
CRITERIA |
REQUIRED |
PROVIDED |
|
Minimum Lot Area for 2 Units |
2,650 Sq. Ft. |
2,849.48 Sq. Ft. |
|
Lot Coverage Maximum |
65% |
60% |
|
Height Maximum |
30’-0” |
33’-0” (per HBMC Section 17.16.020(B) if approved by the Planning Commission) |
|
Front Yard Setback Minimum |
Unit A: 5’-0” Unit B: 3’-0” or 9’-0” or 17’-0” |
Unit A: 5’-0” Unit B: 9’-0” |
|
Side Yard Setback Minimum |
3’-0” |
Unit A and Unit B: 3’- 0” |
|
Rear Yard Setback Minimum (1st/2nd floor) |
3’-0”/1’-0” |
Unit B: 3’-0”/1’-0” |
|
Total Parking Spaces Minimum |
6 spaces total |
6 spaces total |
|
Garage Spaces Minimum |
4 (2 per unit) |
4 (2 per unit) |
|
Guest Space Minimum |
1 space |
Unit A: 2 spaces Unit B: 1 space |
|
Driveway Maximum Slope |
20% |
Unit A: 4% max Unit B: 10% max |
|
Open Space Per Unit Minimum |
300 Sq. Ft. per unit |
Unit A: 332 Sq. Ft. Unit B: 315 Sq. Ft. |
|
Minimum Unit Size |
1,600 Sq. Ft. |
Unit A: 2,113 Sq. Ft. Unit B: 2,018 Sq. Ft. |
|
Storage Area (Per Unit) Minimum |
200 Cu. Ft. |
Unit A: 252 Cu. Ft. Unit B: 252 Cu. Ft. |
|
Solid Waste Area (Per Unit) |
Area for 3 bins at 2.5’ by 2.5’ each |
A screened trash facility is located adjacent to the driveway on both 1st Street and 1st Court |
Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions
Draft Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R’s) have been submitted to by the applicant for review. If the project is approved, the Planning Division would review the CC&R’s for compliance with applicable sections of the zoning ordinance, state law, and this entitlement.
Access and Parking
There is currently no driveway access from 1st Street. The proposed project would create a 16’-0” curb cut to access the garage and guest parking spaces for Unit A. The new curb cut results in a loss of on-street parking however HBMC Section 17.44.020(B) establishes that “one (1) additional space of on-site guest parking shall be provided for each on-street space lost because of new curb cuts and/or driveways.” The applicant is proposing two additional guest parking spaces (One additional for Unit A and one additional for Unit B) to accommodate this standard and HBMC Section 17.22.050(E) which states “required off-street parking spaces, except guest parking spaces, shall be permanently and irrevocably assigned to particular units within the project on the basis of the required parking per unit.”
Access to the garage and guest parking for Unit B is located from 1st Court. Modifications and encroachments in the public right-of-way would require permits from the Department of Public Works.
Landscape and Green Measures
The proposed landscape plan includes a mixture of drought tolerant plants shrubs, perennials, grasses, and groundcover. One 15-inch box western rebud tree is proposed to be planted to the north of the property of 1st Street. All landscaped areas are proposed to include an automatic irrigation system to ensure landscaping materials are maintained on the property. Further, all proposed landscaping material is water conserving as required in Hermosa Beach Water Conservation and Drought Management Ordinances.
The proposed project shall comply with HBMC Chapter 8.44 Hermosa Beach Stormwater and Urban Runoff Pollution Control Regulations. Additionally, 65% of demolition debris must be recycled, and cement used in foundation mix design must be reduced by not less than 20%, among other requirements. HMBC Chapter 15.32 (Electrical Code) requires installation of conduit sized to accommodate solar energy and solar thermal systems.
Compatibility with Surrounding Area
The subject site is zoned R-3 Multiple-Family Residential Zone with similar residentially zoned properties to the north, east and west and R-P Residential Professional Zone to the south. The surrounding residential area is comprised of multi-story, multi-family residences with some single-story single-family residences. The proposed project would be compatible with the surrounding area as it would be a multi-story condominium development. The proposed architecture would also be compatible with the surrounding area as there are existing developments that incorporated a contemporary architectural theme.
The proposed project’s building configuration would be consistent with the neighborhood’s development pattern in as structures on the same lot front both 1st Street and 1st Court. The proposed project’s building configuration would be consistent with the overall character of the neighborhood.
Subdivision Map
The applicant has applied for a Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 83472. A vesting tentative parcel map grants vested rights to proceed with a project in accordance with the ordinances, polices and standards in effect at the time the application for approval of the vesting tentative map is completed. The proposed two-unit condominium is on an existing 2,849.48 square foot lot, with a 30-foot lot width. The R-3 zone requires a minimum lot size of 1,320 square feet per unit; thus allowing a maximum of two dwelling units on the 2,849.48 square foot lot. The lot is similar in lot sizes and lot widths to surrounding properties within the same zone, and the General Plan Land Use designation for lots in the vicinity, and thus complies with Hermosa Beach ordinances regarding subdivision of lots.
The proposed two-unit condominium can connect to the existing utilities that service the residential uses in the immediate neighborhood. In addition, the existing utilities have the capacity to serve the proposed development. The submitted plans were preliminarily reviewed by the Fire Department, Public Works Department, and Building & Safety Division, and no major concerns were identified.
The proposed subdivision and improvements are compliant with criteria for approval of a subdivision map and are not likely to cause serious public health problems within the proposed subdivision. The design of the proposed subdivision is compatible with the immediate residential environment.
The proposed project is also subject to the Park and Recreation Facilities Area Dedication fees. A condition of approval has been included requiring payment of fees at the time of building permit issuance.
General Plan Consistency
The proposed two-unit condominium is located within the High Density Residential (HD) General Plan land use designation area; the purpose of this designation is to provide a range of residential housing types to serve the varying living accommodation needs or desires of the community. The intent of this designation is to preserve and contribute to the inventory of diverse housing types available to residents and offer alternatives to single-family residential development. The designation allows for a variety of high-density building types and development patterns.
This designation provides a range of residential building formats including condominiums, townhouses, duplex/triplex, and apartment buildings. The appropriate density range is between 25.1 to 33.0 dwelling units per acre.
The subject site is also located within the Sand Section Neighborhood character area as indicated in the City’s General Plan, which accommodates a range of small-scale apartments adjacent to single-family homes and integrates a mixtures of housing types.
The intent to enhance multi-modal connectivity and access while preserving the building form, scale, and orientation in this neighborhood. Through new multi-modal connections, convenient access to community parks and the Greenbelt is provided and helps to maintain the compact urban format and highly connected street network of this neighborhood.
Building Design and Orientation discourages flat, box-like front facades in favor of greater articulation; garages and parking are typically accessed through alleyways or driveways that extend behind buildings; this area includes prevailing setback requirements for front, side, and rear setbacks that vary from block to block.
The proposed project is consistent with the HD Land Use Designation in that it would contribute to the residential neighborhood as a multi-family (two-unit on a single lot) development and meets the intent of the Sand Section Neighborhood character area with a density of 27.6 dwelling units per acre and through providing garages and parking behind the buildings. The design of the attached two-unit development is consistent with the Sand Section Neighborhood character area in that the driveway extends behind the buildings, the front building provides a 5-foot front yard setback to match the prevailing setback on this street, and both units have been designed with building articulation elements such as staggered building facades, vertical and horizontal architectural bands and columns and large balconies and roof decks with a mixture of architectural finishes.
The proposed project is consistent with the following Goals and Policies of PLAN Hermosa Land Use and Design Element:
Ø Goal 1: Create a sustainable urban form and land use patterns that support a robust economy and high quality of life for residents.
o Policy 1.6 Scale and context. Consider the compatibility of new development within its urban context to avoid abrupt changes in scale and massing.
Ø Goal 2: Neighborhoods provide for diverse needs of residents of all ages and abilities, and are organized to support healthy and active lifestyles.
o Policy 2.3 Balanced neighborhoods. Promote a diverse range of housing unit types and sizes, within allowed density.
Ø Goal 5. Quality and authenticity in architecture and site design in all construction and renovation of buildings.
o Policy 5.6 Eclectic and diverse architecture. Seek to maintain and enhance neighborhood character through eclectic and diverse architectural styles.
CEQA Compliance
The proposed project is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act as defined in Section 15303(b), Class 3 Exemption, New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures, because the proposal pertains to construction of limited numbers (two) of new, small structures. More specifically, the project is comprised of multi-family residential structures in an urbanized area, totaling no more than six dwelling units. Moreover, none of the exceptions to the Categorical Exemption apply, nor would the project result in a significant cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place over time or have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances or damage a scenic highway or scenic resources within a state scenic highway. The site is not located on a hazardous waste site and would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.
Summary
Staff finds that the conditions of HBMC Section 17.16.020(B) are adequately met and recommends the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 22-XX approving the Height Limit Exception.
The project and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map, as conditioned, are consistent with the zoning code, subdivision laws and other relevant provisions of the Municipal Code, and the site is physically suitable for the type and density of proposed development. Therefore, staff recommends adoption of Resolution No. 22-XX approving the Conditional Use Permit, Precise Development Plan, Vesting Tentative Parcel Map #83472 for a two-unit attached condominium project at 125 1st Court, and determine the project is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Attachments
1. Resolution No. 22-XX -Height Limit Exception
2. Resolution No. 22-XX - CUP, PDP, VTPM
3. Applicant Justification for Height Limit Exception
4. Site Photographs
5. SUPPLEMENTAL - Approved Height Limit Exception Cases Map
6. Surrounding Properties Exceeding the 30’-0” Height Limit Map
7. Radius Map
8. Poster Verification
9. Project Plans
10. Topographic Survey
11. Ordinance No. N.S. 443
12. Ordinance No. 92-1074
13. Ordinance No. 95-1136
14. Email from Daniel Pondella 3/4/22
15. Email from Dana Rose 3/10/22
16. SUPPLEMENTAL - Emails & eComments Received for 125 1st Court
Respectfully Submitted by: Melanie Hall, Interim Associate Planner
Concur: Carlos Luis, Interim Senior Planner
Legal Review: Patrick Donegan, City Attorney
Approved: Ken Robertson, Community Development Director