HomeMy WebLinkAboutReed Residence PA2019-060-VA2019-002 - Planning Commission Agenda Item #4 - Sokolich Response_05-23-2019 4-03-15 PMFrom: Pua Whitford <PWhitford@caaplanning.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2019 4:04 PM
To: Murillo, Jaime
Cc: Shawna Schaffner
Subject: Reed Residence PA2019-060/VA2019-002 - Planning Commission Agenda
Item #4 - Sokolich Response
Hi Jaime,
This correspondence is provided in response to a letter of opposition provided by Mr. Gary Sokolich,
dated May 22, 2019. Mr. Sokolich raised several concerns and assertions. Our responses are
concentrated on the issues he raised as numbered 1 through 5 in his letter.
1. There are several lots in the area that would be considered “considerably wider than adjacent
lots.” For example:
The subject property 1113 Kings Road is 17,745 sq.ft. and 84 feet wide.
1201/1121 Kings Rd (next to subject property) was originally 21,471 sq.ft. prior to the
lot split in 1973 (122 feet wide)
1021 Kings Road is 19,013 sq.ft. (92 feet wide)
1211 Kings Road is 14,925 sq.ft. (75 feet wide)
1421 Kings Road is 14,080 sq.ft. (80 feet wide)
615 Kings Road is 18,247 sq.ft. (121 feet wide)
801 Kings Road is 11,667 sq.ft. (70 feet wide)
Contrary to the commenter’s assertion that the subject lot was purposefully subdivided as a
larger lot to account for the gully, the adjoining neighbor to the east at 1101 Kings Road does
not have a wider or larger than average lot and is also challenged topographically by the gully
and requires a variance for main level development, just as the subject property. There is no
statistical for historical data to support the commenters assertions that the reason for the width
or size of the subject property is to compensate for the gully.
2. There is no statistical or historical data to support the commenters assertions regarding the
reason for the width or size of the subject property or the widths or sizes of any of the other
larger properties on the blufftop on Kings Road.
A survey of aerial mapping shows that the prevailing development in the community is for
homes to be built the entire width of the property. A variance was granted for the existing
structure on the subject site due to the constraints of the gully. The issuance of a variance would
allow the home to be built the width of the lot and afford the homeowner the same privilege as
enjoyed by the adjoining neighbor who also shares the gully and requires a variance for
development, and the rest of the community.
3. The frontage of the home along Kings Road will be built to a maximum height of 25-8 feet when
a maximum of 29 feet is permitted, and has been designed as thoughtfully as possible so as not
to “max out” either the height or massing, and does not require a variance for its features. The
home is terraced down the slope and the area which requires the variance is on the main level
and small portion of the back corner of the upper level and upper deck which will not be visible
from Kings Road or from the residences inland of Kings Road.
A variance would not be necessary were it not for the topographic anomaly of the gully. Again,
the variance will not permit any roof features to be higher than any other part of the roof. In
fact, the area for which the variance is required is for the eaves for the roof and is located at an
elevation lower than the ridgeline of the roof.
The hardship related to the limitation of buildable area is due to the presence of the gully
adjacent to the east property line. The existing slope of the eastern property line is 40%
whereas the existing slope adjacent to the west property line is 5%. Avoiding the existing gully
would reduce the buildable width of the structure from 80 ft. wide to 55 ft. wide (32%
reduction), which would be a hardship. The requested variance only accounts for the
mathematical calculation between how the City determines the overall grade of a parcel and the
actual grade.
4. There is no evidentiary data to support this assertion. The requested variance is for an existing
condition. A variance was issued for the existing structure at the exact location and due to the
same topographical constraints.
5. The over-height features will be located on the main level and small portion of the back corner
of the upper level which will not be visible from the street. They will not, themselves, cause
interference with the coastal views of adjacent or neighboring properties. Although the over-
height features are calculated as such based on the City’s zoning code, the observed heights will
not be taller than other area of the residence.
The proposed two-story residence will replace an existing one-story residence. The portion of
the residence that may cause limitations to coastal views for the across the street neighbor
would be the portion of the residence on the Kings Road frontage. This portion of the residence
will be 25-8 feet in height and is well within the 29-foot height limit.
While certain lots along Kings Road are subject to private deed restrictions related to view
protection, there is no such deed restriction on 1113 Kings Road. In addition, there are no view
corridors within the project vicinity that would be impacted by the proposed project.
If you have any further questions please do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely,
Pua