MONTEREY COUNTY PLANNING & BUILDING INSPECTION DEPARTMENT st AVENUE MARINA, CA (831) FAX: (831)

Transcription

1 MONTEREY COUNTY PLANNING & BUILDING INSPECTION DEPARTMENT st AVENUE MARINA, CA (831) FAX: (831) MONTEREY COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting: September 8, :00 a.m. Agenda Item: 1 Consider an appeal (PLN Can ada Woods North, LLC) of an administrative interpretation by the Director to require either a Map Amendment or a Minor Subdivision, not a Lot Line Adjustment as requested by the applicant, for an application (PLN040068) to adjust three undeveloped lots totaling acres including: 1) decreasing Lot 71 from acres to acres, abandoning an established building envelope, adjusting a second building envelope, and amending a scenic easement (assessors parcel number ); 2) increasing Lot 72 from acres to acres creating a new road and utility easement, and amending a scenic easement (assessors parcel number ); and 3) adjust property line location with no net increase/decrease of property size, adjustment of the building envelope, and amending a scenic easement (assessors parcel number ). Project Location: Monterra Ranch: Via Paraiso Rd x Via Malpaso Road, Lots 71, 72, and 73 (Assessors Parcel Numbers , 58, & 59) Plan Area: Greater Monterey Peninsula Zoning Designation: RDR/B-6-UR-D-S Department: Planning and Building Inspection RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the deny the appeal and affirm the opinion rendered by the Department of Planning and Building Inspection in this matter, based on the reasons set forth below, discussion attached hereto as Exhibit B and the findings and evidence attached hereto as Exhibit C. SUMMARY: The appellant submitted an application (PLN030068) for a Lot Line Adjustment on June 15, 2004, at which time planning staff reviewed the request, applicable County codes, and recent determinations of the Subdivision Committee,, and Board of Supervisors relating to Lot Line Adjustments, Map Amendments, and Subdivisions. Staff determined that the application was not a Lot Line Adjustment but rather either a Map Amendment or a Minor Subdivision and advised the applicant of the Departments conclusion.

2 The appellant makes the following claims disputing the decision of the Planning and Building Inspection Department that the proposed application is indeed a request for a Lot Line Adjustment and not a Map Amendment or Minor Subdivision: 1. That Monterey County Code and Government Code state that a Lot Line Adjustment is filed where lot boundaries are adjusted and a greater number of lots than originally existed are not created. The proposed application is adjusting the boundaries of three existing separate lots and the final configuration does not result in a greater number of lots; therefore, qualifying as a Lot Line Adjustment; 2. That the Subdivision Map Act (Government Code 66412(d)) specifically provides that the County can condition a Lot Line Adjustment to include conditions that will facilitate the relocation of existing utilities, infrastructure, or easements. The proposed lot line adjustment simply includes relocation of easements and therefore qualifies as a Lot Line Adjustment; 3. That the County Code and Map Act states that the County s review of a Lot Line Adjustment is limited to determination of whether or not the parcels resulting from the lot line adjustment will conform to the local General Plan, any applicable Coastal Plan and Zoning and Building Ordinances and that no tentative map, parcel map, or final map shall be required as a condition of approval of the lot line adjustment; and 4. Subdivision is defined as the division, by any subdivider, of any unit or units of improved or unimproved land... (Government Code 66424). The proposed application does not contain a division of land and is therefore a Lot Line Adjustment. As outlined in the discussion included within Exhibit B and the findings and evidence (Exhibit C ) staff refutes these claims by concluding that: 1) The application, as a whole, is not a simple adjustment of boundaries or moving of easements but is instead a relocation of property boundaries; scenic, utility, and access easements; building envelopes; and roads/driveways into documented sensitive habitat and is therefore, not a Lot Line Adjustment. 2) A precedent has been established by the County with review and approval of several recent Map Amendments, which determined when a Lot Line Adjustment or a Map Amendment is the appropriate course of action and this request meets the requirements of a Map Amendment. PLN Canada Woods North Appeal (PLN040477) Page 2 of 12

3 OTHER AGENCY INVOLVEMENT: County Counsel concurs in this opinion. Note: The decision by the is final and not appealable. Therese M. Schmidt, Senior Planner (831) ; cc: ers; County Counsel; Scott Hennessy; Dale Ellis; Alana Knaster; Lynne Mounday; Derinda L. Messenger, Lobardo & Gilles (appellant); Attachments: Exhibit A Project Data Sheet Exhibit B Discussion Exhibit C Recommended Findings and Evidence Exhibit D Letter to Derinda L. Messenger from Scott Hennessy dated July 16, 2004 Exhibit E. Letter to Chairperson John E. Wilmot, Monterey County dated July 26, 2004 This report was reviewed by Lynne Mounday, Planning and Building Services Manager PLN Canada Woods North Appeal (PLN040477) Page 3 of 12

4 EXHIBIT A PLN Canada Woods North Appeal (PLN040477) Page 4 of 12

5 EXHIBIT B DISCUSSION BACKGROUND The appellant submitted an application (PLN Ca nada Woods North, LLC) for a Lot Line Adjustment on June 15, 2004, at which time planning staff reviewed the request, applicable County codes, and recent determinations of the Subdivision Committee,, and Board of Supervisors relating to Lot Line Adjustments, Map Amendments, and Subdivisions. Staff determined that in addition to the requested Lot Line Adjustment the applicant was also requesting modification to the existing building envelopes; scenic, utility, and access easements; and reconfiguration of the access road and driveways. Staff determined that the proposed three lots are located within an existing eight lot subdivision created through a Final Subdivision Map entitled Ca nada Woods North, Phase II approved by the Monterey County Board of Supervisors on December The Phase was anticipated and reviewed as part of an overall planned development (originally known as Monterra Ranch) and included certification of an Environmental Impact Report. A similar request was made to the Planning and Building Inspection Department (PLN Ca nada Woods North) in which the applicant also requested a Lot Line Adjustment; however, a recommendation was made by the Subdivision Committee on June 26, 2003 to the Planning Commission to require a Map Amendment. The Subdivision Committee based this recommendation on information provided by staff regarding previous approvals, the Subdivision Map Act, and a determination that when a map is recorded with building envelopes and scenic easements, a map amendment or new subdivision may be necessary to changes these areas depending on the impact to sensitive habitat. Staff determined that the appellant s proposed Lot Line Adjustment would meet the previously established test indicating that either a map amendment or a new subdivision would be required since the requested adjustments may impact sensitive habitat. BASIS OF APPEAL Pursuant to Section of the Zoning Ordinance, on July 29, 2004, the applicant appealed the Planning and Building Inspection Department s decision to the. In her appeal Derinda Messenger makes four claims regarding the Directors decision that the proposed application is not a Lot Line Adjustment and should be processed as either a Map Amendment or a Minor Subdivision: 1. That Monterey County Code and Government Code state that a Lot Line Adjustment is filed where lot boundaries are adjusted and a greater number of lots than originally existed are not created. The proposed application is adjusting the boundaries of three existing separate lots and the final configuration does not result in a greater number of lots; therefore, qualifying as a Lot Line Adjustment; 2. That the Subdivision Map Act (Government Code 66412(d)) specifically provides that the County can condition a Lot Line Adjustment to include conditions that will facilitate the relocation of existing utilities, infrastructure, or easements. The proposed lot line PLN Canada Woods North Appeal (PLN040477) Page 5 of 12

6 adjustment simply includes relocation of easements and therefore qualifies as a Lot Line Adjustment; 3. That the County Code and Map Act states that the County s review of a Lot Line Adjustment is limited to determination of whether or not the parcels resulting from the lot line adjustment will conform to the local General Plan, any applicable Coastal Plan and Zoning and Building Ordinances and that no tentative map, parcel map, or final map shall be required as a condition of approval of the lot line adjustment; and 4. Subdivision is defined as the division, by any subdivider, of any unit or units of improved or unimproved land... (Government Code 66424). The proposed application does not contain a division of land and is therefore a Lot Line Adjustment. Following is staff s analysis of these four contentions: Contention Number 1 The proposed application is adjusting the boundaries of three existing separate lots and the final configuration does not result in a greater number of lots; therefore, qualifying as a Lot Line Adjustment Staff Response Staff concurs with the applicant s contention that the proposed application includes a request to adjust the boundaries of three existing separate lots and the final configuration does not result in a greater number of lots; however, in addition to the modification of the existing lot lines the request includes adjustments to scenic easements, public utility easements, building envelopes, and access routes. Therefore, the application as a whole involves much more than just adjusting property lines and does not constitute a Lot Line Adjustment. Contention Number 2 The proposed lot line adjustment simply includes relocation of easements and therefore qualifies as a Lot Line Adjustment Staff Response As indicated above, staff concurs with the applicant that the application contains a request for relocation of easements; however, the application also contains a request for relocation of building envelopes and access routes. In addition, the easements requested include scenic easements over identified sensitive habitat. The habitat was identified in an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the Canada Woods North subdivision, dated November 1, 1996, and approved by the Monterey County Board of Supervisors on December 17, 1996, upon recommendations by the Greater Monterey Peninsula Land Use Advisory Committee,, Subdivision Committee, and public comment. Staff contends that the Board has taken the time to evaluate the existing map in relation to building envelopes, easements, and access routes and made a determination of approval based on the review process and public hearings. To allow changes to these areas under a ministerial act such as a Lot Line Adjustment would in effect circumvent the decision makers and deny the PLN Canada Woods North Appeal (PLN040477) Page 6 of 12

7 public an opportunity to comment on potential impacts to existing scenic easements and sensitive habitat. Contention Number 3 That the County Code and Map Act states that the County s review of a Lot Line Adjustment is limited to determination of whether or not the parcels resulting from the lot line adjustment will conform to the local General Plan, any applicable Coastal Plan and Zoning and Building Ordinances and that no tentative map, parcel map, or final map shall be required as a condition of approval of the lot line adjustment. Staff Response Staff is in agreement with the applicant s interpretation of the County Code and Map Act regarding review of Lot Line Adjustments. However, staff has concluded that the application submitted is not a Lot Line Adjustment on the basis of the whole application which includes changes to scenic easements, building envelopes, and access roads. Staff has advised the applicant that they must submit an application for either a map amendment or a minor subdivision in order to provide the original decision making bodies an opportunity to review the proposed changes through the public hearing process and to ensure that the proposed modifications will not cause substantial environmental damage to an identified sensitive habitat. Contention 4 Subdivision is defined as the division, by any subdivider, of any unit or units of improved or unimproved land... (Government Code 66424). The proposed application does not contain a division of land and is therefore a Lot Line Adjustment. Staff Response Staff concurs with the definition of a subdivision provided by Government Code 66424; however, this does not change staff s determination that the proposed application is not a Lot Line Adjustment. Monterey County Code Title 19, Chapter requires a Map Amendment in order to make modifications to a final map where there are changes which make any or all of the conditions of the map no longer appropriate or necessary. As proposed, the application would adjust an approved scenic easement which was required to mitigate impacts to sensitive habitat. In addition, based on precedence created with adoption of the above mentioned Map Amendment for planning application PLN030064/Canada Woods North, the proposed application meets the test established to determine when a project constitutes a Lot Line Adjustment as opposed to a Map Amendment. PLN Canada Woods North Appeal (PLN040477) Page 7 of 12

8 EXHIBIT C RECOMMENDED FINDINGS AND EVIDENCE PLN Ca nada Woods North, LLC 1. FINDING: An appeal (PLN Can ada Woods North, LLC) of an administrative interpretation by the Director on July 27, 2004, to require either a Map Amendment or a Minor Subdivision, not a Lot Line Adjustment as requested by the applicant, for an application (PLN040068) to adjust three undeveloped lots totaling acres including: 1) decreasing Lot 71 from acres to acres, abandoning an established building envelope, adjusting a second building envelope, and amending a scenic easement (assessors parcel number ); 2) increasing Lot 72 from acres to acres creating a new road and utility easement, and amending a scenic easement (assessors parcel number ); and 3) adjust property line location with no net increase/decrease of property size, adjustment of the building envelope, and amending a scenic easement (assessors parcel number ) was filed by Derinda L. Messenger. The appeal was timely filed on July 29, EVIDENCE: (a) Said appeal has been filed with the Secretary of the Planning Commission within the time prescribed by Monterey County pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Chapter 21.82; (b) Said appeal has been determined to be complete; (c) The has reviewed, evaluated, and considered the appeal and responds as follows: Contention Number 1 Appellant alleges that the proposed application is adjusting the boundaries of three existing separate lots and the final configuration does not result in a greater number of lots; therefore, qualifying as a Lot Line Adjustment. Commission Finding: This portion of the appeal is denied. The application as a whole involves much more than just adjusting property lines and includes proposed changes which may impact sensitive habitat. A Lot Line Adjustment is not the appropriate mechanism to use in adjusting easements, property lines, building envelopes, and access routes when said changes have the potential to negatively impact a sensitive habitat. Contention Number 2 Appellant alleges that the proposed lot line adjustment simply includes relocation of easements and therefore qualifies as a Lot Line Adjustment. Commission Finding: PLN Canada Woods North Appeal (PLN040477) Page 8 of 12

9 This portion of the appeal is denied. The adjustments requested will encroach into sensitive habitat. The habitat was identified in an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the Canada Woods North subdivision, dated November 1, 1996, and approved by the Monterey County Board of Supervisors on December 17, 1996, upon recommendations by the Greater Monterey Peninsula Land Use Advisory Committee,, Subdivision Committee, and public comment. The Board has taken the time to evaluate the existing map in relation to building envelopes, easements, and access routes and made a determination of approval based on the review process and public hearings. To allow changes to these areas under a ministerial act such as a Lot Line Adjustment would in effect circumvent the decision makers and deny the public an opportunity to comment on potential impacts to existing scenic easements and sensitive habitat. Contention Number 3 The appellant alleges that the County Code and Map Act states that the County s review of a Lot Line Adjustment is limited to determination of whether or not the parcels resulting from the lot line adjustment will conform to the local General Plan, any applicable Coastal Plan and Zoning and Building Ordinances and that no tentative map, parcel map, or final map shall be required as a condition of approval of the lot line adjustment. Commission Finding: This portion of the appeal is denied. The applicant s contention would be a true statement if a Lot Line Adjustment is processed; however, this Commission has determined that a Lot Line Adjustment is not an appropriate mechanism to process adjustments to an approved map which may impact sensitive habitat. Contention 4 The appellant alleges a subdivision is defined as the division, by any subdivider, of any unit or units of improved or unimproved land... (Government Code 66424). The proposed application does not contain a division of land and is therefore a Lot Line Adjustment. Commission Finding: This portion of the appeal is denied. Determining that the proposed request is not a subdivision does not automatically mean that the request is a Lot Line Adjustment. Based on precedence created with adoption of application PLN030064/Canada Woods North, the proposed application meets the test established to determine when a project constitutes a Map Amendment as opposed to a Lot Line Adjustment. PLN Canada Woods North Appeal (PLN040477) Page 9 of 12

10 EXHIBIT D PLN Canada Woods North Appeal (PLN040477) Page 10 of 12

11 EXHIBIT E PLN Canada Woods North Appeal (PLN040477) Page 11 of 12

12 PLN Canada Woods North Appeal (PLN040477) Page 12 of 12