8/26/2015 Item #10F Page 1

Transcription

1 8/26/2015 Item #10F Page 1 MEETING DATE: August 26, 2015 PREPARED BY: Diane S. Langager, Principal Planner DEPT. DIRECTOR: Jeff Murphy DEPARTMENT: Planning and Building ACTING CITY MANAGER: Lisa Rudloff SUBJECT: Council to consider possible options for a local ordinance that regulates the size of single-family homes to make them more consistent with existing neighborhoods, similar to the ordinances adopted by the City of Los Angeles and City of Solana Beach. RECOMMENDED ACTION: City Council takes the following actions: 1) Receive report; 2) Receive and consider public testimony; and, 3) Provide direction to staff as appropriate. STRATEGIC PLAN: This agenda report relates to the Community Planning Focus Area of the City s Strategic Plan. FISCAL CONSIDERATIONS: There is no fiscal impact associated with this overview. Should Council direct staff to develop a local ordinance, staff anticipates that the tasks can be covered under the existing Department budget. BACKGROUND: At the July 16, 2014 City Council meeting, Council member Tony Kranz requested, as part of a Future Agenda Item, that City staff return with information on recent mansionization ordinances that were adopted by the cities of Los Angeles and Solana Beach. Mansionization is a term used to describe situations where newly constructed homes are built substantially larger in comparison to the existing, often times smaller homes found in the immediate neighborhood. When mansionization occurs, the new homes typically maximize the full development potential of a building site and the home is often perceived as bulky and massive in scale. Homes that maximize the site may negatively impact and/or disrupt the valued character and traditional scale of the adjacent residences and surrounding neighborhoods. Potential impacts often associated with mansionization include reduced open

2 8/26/2015 Item #10F Page 2 areas for landscaping, a lack of privacy, diminished natural light, domineering visual presence of the structure and loss of neighborhood cohesion. Defining community character and seeking out ways to address site design of new homes or remodels was also considered by Council in Similar to the situation today, citizens back then expressed concerns with development projects regarding the size, bulk and mass of new homes, as well as the proximity in which they are located to adjacent residences. In response, the Council created the Community Character Implementation Program (CCIP) to help address some of these issues related to residential development. In 2003, a draft ordinance was presented before Council that included recommendations developed through the CCIP process. This Agenda Report responds to the Council s specific direction and also includes a summary of the code changes that were made in ANALYSIS: The agenda report makes reference to different zoning or planning terms that are often utilized to discuss how development may occur on a building site (i.e. floor area ratio/far). As such, Attachment A provides a glossary of the more common terms used to better help understand how the standards are applied. Attachment B provides a narrative description of the more significant provisions of the zoning codes for Los Angeles, Solana Beach and Encinitas, while Attachment C provides a detailed side-by-side comparative table of the three codes. Below is an overview of how the LA and Solana Beach codes differ from the CCIP regulations adopted by the City in A. Ordinance Comparisons The CCIP regulations that were adopted by Encinitas were intended to encourage site and structural development that respected the physical characteristics of the site and while avoiding impacts to surrounding homes. Although the City has existing rules in place that govern single-family development, at times some residents express concerns that the City s existing regulations do not adequately address bulk and mass or community character. However, based on a review of the Los Angeles, Solana Beach and Encinitas ordinances, only a few factors seem to be covered or treated differently; these differences are summarized below: Considering lot size when calculating FAR: The City of Encinitas only assigns a FAR to a zone type, whereas the cities of Los Angeles and Solana Beach account for lot size when calculating a maximum floor area. If the City followed this type of approach the maximum floor area would be based on both the underlying zone and lot size, which would enable the City to tailor the maximum residential floor area on a property to the size of the lot. Phantom floor space: The City of Encinitas does not address excessive ceiling heights in the zoning code. Los Angeles and Solana Beach double floor area calculations in those areas with phantom floor space. If the City followed this model, the overall, permitted floor area of homes with phantom space would be reduced which could also reduce the perceived bulk and mass. Additionally, this type of

3 8/26/2015 Item #10F Page 3 regulation may also discourage the use of excessive ceiling heights in the design of new homes or remodels. Limiting upper level construction above basement garages: As part of the CCIP, the City of Encinitas considered a second floor stepback of 10 ft from the front face of the basement level on sloped lots. However, these provisions were not ultimately adopted. Therefore the City does not have any limitations in its zoning code that limits upper level construction above basement garages. If the City established these provisions, the front facade of the building would be setback, establishing more building articulation. B. Other Local Regulations There are other localities in addition to Los Angeles and Solana Beach that have addressed the mansionization issue through the adoption of development standards to help maintain the unique character of their communities and/or to prevent future issues with bulk, scale and mass of new homes or remodels. A few of these different approaches are briefly summarized below. Establish a maximum home size regardless of lot size (City of Palo Alto). Reduce the maximum allowable size for certain accessory structures (various). Establish open space requirements for residential lots, requiring a certain percentage of the buildable area of the lot to be left open (Laguna Beach). Require garages to be located behind the primary structure if it is the prevailing location for other garages on the block (City of Pasadena). Height proportionality, where additional setbacks are required based on vertical massing (Laguna Beach). Second story step-backs or additional daylight setbacks applied in certain areas to reduce bulk and appearance of structures from neighboring homes or the street (various). Place restriction on additions to or enlargements of nonconforming structures (various). ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21065, this action does not constitute a project within the meaning of CEQA in that it has no potential to cause either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and therefore does not require environmental review. The action before the Council is to consider options for updating the City s zoning code to address development standards in relation to bulk and mass of a structure and provide direction to staff on how and whether to proceed with the ordinance update. Any amendments to the City s Zoning Ordinance will require compliance with CEQA prior to Council decision

4 8/26/2015 Item #10F Page 4 ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Attachment B: Attachment C: Zoning Glossary Mansionization Ordinances Summaries and Links Mansionization Ordinances Comparative Table

5 8/26/2015 Item #10F Page 5 Attachment A Zoning Glossary

6 8/26/2015 Item #10F Page 6 ZONING GLOSSARY Floor Area Ratio (FAR) How it is defined by Planning? A numerical value, expressed as a decimal fraction obtained by dividing the total floor area by the gross lot area of the lot. It includes the surrounding exterior walls of a building, exclusive of areas not utilized as livable area. How is it applied? What it really means? FAR is a tool to compare the area of a building to the total size of the lot. FAR counts the total floor area and bulk of a building, not just the building s footprint. The total floor area of a home that has 2,000 sq.ft. on the first story and 1,200 sq.ft. on the second story is 3,200 sq.ft. The FAR of this 3,200 sq.ft. home on a 8,000 sq.ft. lot is calculated in the following manner: Example building footprints, all with a 2.0 FAR. 3,200 sq.ft. 8,000 sq.ft. = 0.4 FAR. A 0.4 FAR means that for every square foot of land, the homeowner may build 0.4 square feet of building. Lot Coverage How it is defined by Planning? Percentage of a lot, exclusive of the ultimate street right-of- way, which when viewed directly from above, would be covered by the floor area of the building or buildings. Minor accessory structures are not counted toward the lot coverage requirement. How is it applied? What it really means? Portion of a lot, which when viewed from the sky, is covered by a building. Some specific things are not counted towards a lot coverage calculation. The total lot coverage of a home that has 2,000 sq.ft. on the first story and 1,200 sq.ft. directly above it on the second story is 2,000 sq.ft. The lot coverage of this 3,200 sq.ft. home on a 8,000 sq.ft. lot is calculated in the following manner: Example building footprints with different lot coverages, but same FAR requirement. 2,000 sq.ft. 8,000 sq.ft. = 0.25 lot coverage Generally the percentage of the lot within which a building must fit changes based on specified FAR and lot coverage requirements. Second story construction is incentivized when the permitted FAR increases relative to a lot coverage standard. Refer to the different FAR and lot coverage pairings in the table on the right.

7 8/26/2015 Item #10F Page 7 Front, Side, or Rear Yard Setback How it is defined by Planning? The area which defines the depth of the required front, side, or rear yard. Said setback shall be measured with a perpendicular distance from the property line or the ultimate street right-of-way line. What it really means? The required open area on a lot. It provides the possible configuration and siting of where a building can be built on a lot. Example of two homes with a front and rear yard, but no side yard on one side. Setback requirements help control where a lot may be covered by buildings and others structures. Building Height How it is defined by Planning? A building s elevation as measured from the pad level or base plane to the roof of the building (except for permitted obstructions, such as chimneys). What it really means? How tall your building can be. Example of a building that was constructed that has excessive height in relation to the size of the lot. While FAR and Lot Coverage regulates mass, max building height works in concert with setback requirements to control the building envelope and placement. Building Articulation How it is defined by Planning? Different levels of a structure have different horizontal building restriction lines to increase access to light and air. This could be applied through a step-back line or a daylight or sky exposure plane, in which buildings shall not intercept a plane inclined inwards at an adjacent property line. What it really means? Portion of an upper floor that is pushed back from a yard setback or an adjacent residential property line so the house does not appear to look like a big block. Example of a sky exposure plane to establish areas that remain open. A step-back requirement when combined with other setback regulations controls the space that a building can occupy.

8 8/26/2015 Item #10F Page 8 Attachment B Mansionization Ordinance Summaries and Links

9 8/26/2015 Item #10F Page 9 City of Los Angeles Ordinance No Baseline Mansionization Ordinance The City of Los Angeles created this ordinance in response to an increase in property owners and developers tearing down the original modest-sized houses and replacing them with much larger structures, or significantly remodeled existing structures with large-scale two-story additions which were out of scale with neighboring properties. Concerns included that these structures were significantly larger than the average single-family structure in the City of Los Angeles, and many were large two-story box-like structures built out to the required setbacks with only minimum spacing between houses and large second stories. The result was congested relationships between adjoining houses and a reduction of the neighbors access to direct sunlight and privacy. The Department of City Planning analyzed the development standards for single-family zones and determined that the municipal code allowed for structures that were excessively large and that a citywide code amendment was required to reduce the maximum size of single-family development in single-family zones. The resulting regulations established by the ordinance apply to citywide properties zoned single-family residential, except those located in the Hillside Area, or Coastal Zone, as defined by the California Coastal Commission. The properties zoned single-family residential and located in Hillside Areas were addressed in a subsequent ordinance tailored to residential hillside development. Properties located in the Coastal Zone, as defined by the California Coastal Commission were not included because the proposed code amendments would require substantial coordination and review by the Coastal Commission, delaying the implementation of the ordinance. The ordinance was set to replace the Sunland- Tujunga Interim Control Ordinance which was protecting the City at the time; a delay would have resulted in a lapse of time of protection from mansionization and resulted in further development that is incompatible with existing neighborhoods throughout the City. The main objective of the Baseline Mansionization Ordinance was to resolve most, but not all of the factors that contribute to the problem of mansionization, and deals directly with issues concerning the wide range of lot sizes found in the City and within specific zones, and height limitations. The objective of the Ordinance is to mitigate the perceived mass of structures by introducing controls to encourage articulated structures, especially second-stories. It establishes a maximum Single-Family Residential Floor Area, which varies depending on lot size and zone, adjusting appropriately to prevent structures which are extremely out of proportion with the scale of existing neighborhoods, and addressing mass and scale issues raised by various communities. The ordinance however, still allows for reasonable growth in terms of squarefootage, and creates scenarios whereby a property can either have a single-story structure with a large footprint, a two-story structure with a smaller footprint and larger setbacks, or a slightly larger two-story structure which is articulated. It establishes an Articulation Bonus (20% bonus) to incentivize good design, utilizing one of the defined methods (Proportional Stories Method, Front Façade Stepback Method, and Green Building Method) and in in order to preserve equitable development, a 30% bonus may apply in the R-1 zone when lots are smaller than 5,000 sq.ft. The ordinance also revises height limits for Single-Family Zones, establishing separate limits for sloped roofs and flat roofs and varying per zone. It creates a lower height for flat roofs, in order to reduce building mass from the public right-of-way and neighboring properties. It also adds Single-Story Height District option only available for Single-Family Zones at the request of the community, which would limit homes to a single story. Residential Floor Area Districts would also be a neighborhood specific option which allows for high or lower Residential Floor Area (RFA) limits. Finally, it clarifies that deviations from the new proposed Single-Family Residential

10 8/26/2015 Item #10F Page 10 Floor Area (RFA) requirements shall be granted per the Zoning Administrator s adjustments authority up to 10% adjustments in RFA, anything greater must utilize the variance process. Link to the Baseline Mansionization Ordinance:

11 8/26/2015 Item #10F Page 11 City of Solana Beach Ordinance 357 Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance Ordinance 357 also known as the Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance (Proposition A) was passed by the City of Solana Beach voters in a Special Election held on March 6, The ordinance was set to address concerns that certain neighborhoods were trending to oversized homes compared to their lot sizes. It proactively addresses these concerns with modifications tailored to six specific zones west of Interstate-5. The purpose of the following provisions were to preserve and enhance existing community character and aesthetic quality of the City of Solana Beach, by providing regulations to ensure and protect the character of established residential neighborhoods; and by preserving the traditional scale and seaside orientation of residential areas. The ordinance amends the municipal code, establishing a Scaled Residential Overlay Zone (SROZ). The SROZ applies to six geographical areas west of Interstate 5 in low residential, low medium residential, and medium residential zones. It allows the same densities and uses the underlying residential zones allow, but require superseding property development regulations for: Floor Area Ratios (FAR); and Definitions of Atriums, Bay Windows, and Basements. The SROZ follows a 4-tiered standard to determine FAR. FAR calculations include atriums and garage square footage, if it exceeds the required parking standards. Basements are not counted or may be partially counted for FAR, if they meet exposure requirements, including lightwell standards. The SROZ allows bay windows to extend into setbacks as long as they abide by size and placement standards. Three level building facades are prohibited in SROZs. Minor exceptions for development regulations that may qualify include; increased fence height and the waiving or modification of parking design standards. The Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance was amended in 2014 to further regulate homes sizes as part of an ongoing effort to help define community character and to protect that character from being destroyed as new homes are built. Ordinance 455 was adopted to modify the definition of floor area ratio to include excessive volume or phantom space from ceilings that exceed 15 feet in height that contributes to the bulk in the calculation of floor area ratio. Council also revised the definition of gross floor area to clarify exclusions, including courtyards with walls on three sides and that is not covered and detached accessory buildings that do not exceed 120 sq.ft. in residential zones. Link to the Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance:

12 8/26/2015 Item #10F Page 12 City of Encinitas Ordinance Community Character Implementation Program Ordinance contains a series of amendments to the Municipal Code and Local Coastal Program. The amendments are part of the Community Character Implementation Program (CCIP). The CCIP is a series of development standards and guidelines designed to help maintain that unique character of the City of Encinitas and its five distinct communities. The code amendments were the result of a lengthy public process that began with Community Character Workshops in the Fall of The following is a summary of the amendments. I. Building Height A. Allow 26-foot flat roof/30-foot pitched roof (3:12 or greater) standard in RR through RR1 zones citywide, and in the RR through RR-2 zones (except substandard lots) in Olivenhain. B. Retain present 22-foot flat roof/26-foot pitched roof standard in RR2 and higher zones citywide and for substandard RR2 lots in Olivenhain. Pitched roofs must be of 3:12 or greater. Towers limited to maximum diagonal dimension of 12-foot. In the R-3 and higher zones, for sloped lots, the 12-foot/16-foot envelope remains unchanged. Building Height Summary Flat Roofs Pitched Roofs (Minimum 3:12) RR through RR1 - Citywide - Olivenhain - Standard Lots 26 feet 30 feet RR2 through R25 - Citywide - Olivenhain - Substandard Lots 22 feet 26 feet C. Allow additions/remodels to existing homes in the New Encinitas Community exceeding the 22-foot/26-foot envelope to be constructed at that height (up to 30 feet) consistent with the design character of the home. D. Discontinue present Authority to Exceed Standard Height Envelope process. Variance would be the only process to go above the residential height standard to a maximum of 30 feet pursuant to the General Plan. II. Lot Coverage A. Lot coverage to be defined as the downward projection of ALL habitable portions of the structure - not just the ground floor as presently defined.

13 8/26/2015 Item #10F Page 13 III. Floor Area Ratio (FAR) A. No changes to the present ratios listed by zone in the Municipal Code. B. Floor Area, Bulk definition removed. Replaced with 1. A definition of Floor Area, which is simply the area within the exterior walls of the building (i.e. gross floor area used for calculating parking); and 2. A revised definition of Floor Area Ratio which includes the exemptions contained in the previous bulk floor area definition for purposes of calculating FAR only. IV. Panhandle Lots A. Definition of Lot Line, Rear modified to specify that the rear lot line will typically be the shortest lot line most distant from the terminus of the panhandle, but that, in cases of existing development, the Director can consider the envelope of the existing structures in determining which lot line to designate as the rear lot line. B. Modifies Subdivision design standards to allow panhandle lots when consistent with the existing pattern of development in an area. The present subdivision standards do not allow them except under special circumstances. V. Corner Lots A. Modifies definition of Lot Line, Front to allow the Director the ability to designate a longer street-fronting lot line as the front (presently as the shortest property line abutting a street) in cases where: 1. A subdivision/parcel map specifies another lot line as the front; 2. In cases where existing development has been designed based upon the longer lot line being the front; or

14 8/26/2015 Item #10F Page Where the Director determines that using the longer street frontage as the front lot line results in a building envelope consistent with the character of surrounding development. VI. Garage Location and Enclosed Parking Requirements A. Require first two spaces required for single-family homes and duplexes to be enclosed (presently allowed to be unenclosed). Additional parking other than the first two spaces - can be unenclosed. B. Modify the requirements in the Single Family Residential Zones (Section (B12)) to require: 1. Front setbacks for homes in subdivisions of 5 or more lots to be varied consistent with the pattern of development in the surrounding neighborhood. 2. Require garages in new single-family subdivisions to be located to minimize their visual presence to the extent practical, including use of means such as (a) locating the garage in the rear of the lot but accessed from the front, (b) locating the garage in the front but side loaded, or (c) accessing the garage from an alley or side street where available. VII. Subdivision Design A. Add language to the Single-Family Residential Zones development standards (Section (C)) to also encourage use of alley or side street access to garages, where available. Also, remove language from this Section obsolete language requiring subdivisions to utilize a rectangular lot configuration and to be based upon a concept of small neighborhood areas of generally less than 20 dwelling units. B. Modify net acreage calculation to exclude areas used exclusively to provide access to rear loaded garages to not be deducted from gross acreage when calculating project density. C. Modify the subdivision design standards of Section to: 1. Establish a purpose and intent section, stating that subdivision design is to reflect the existing pattern of development and be consistent with the character of the surrounding community consistent with underlying zoning. 2. Allow panhandle lots when it results in better subdivision design and when consistent with the existing pattern of development in an area

15 8/26/2015 Item #10F Page Encourage the use of a variety of lot sizes within subdivision when consistent with the development pattern of the area, consistent with underlying zoning. 4. Require walkways connecting with City sidewalk/trail systems where the opportunity exists. 5. Require the lot and street design to follow the existing contours of the property to the extent practicable. 6. Modify the Planned Residential Development (PRD) standards to allow dedication of required recreational open space to the City, where desired by the applicant and acceptable to the City. VIII. Grading A. Modify the grading design criteria contained in Chapter of the Grading Ordinance to do the following: 1. Lower the height threshold where slopes must be rounded and blended from 15 feet to 10 feet. 2. Require grading to be designed to retain natural topography and vegetation and cause the least amount of disturbance possible while allowing development. 3. Encourage use of existing building site and pads for new development. 4. Require avoidance of uniform stair-stepping of building pads; utilize differing pad shapes and locations or offsets where possible. 5. Provide that use of engineered, vertical retaining walls shall be avoided where possible and minimized where necessary. Where necessary consideration is to be given to wall offsets, round and use of landscaping. B. In the Inland/Hillside Bluff Overlay Zone, require that all applications involving encroachments in 25% or greater slopes include, at a minimum, details as to the locations of existing and future improvements and proposed building envelopes in order to allow the Planning Commission to assess the required finding that bulk and mass of structures have been minimized to the greatest extent feasible commensurate with preserving slope characteristics of the site. IX. Design Review Regulations A. Delete all regulatory conclusions contained in Chapter of the Municipal Code except for the general conclusions, and replace those, along with the present Design Review Guidelines, with a new comprehensive set of Design Review Guidelines. X. Lighting A. Retain present prohibition of recreational lighting in the Olivenhain community, and NOT extend that prohibition to the coastal communities.

16 8/26/2015 Item #10F Page 16 B. Require that all lighting sources, in both residential and commercial zones be shielded such that light is directed away from adjoining properties, and provide definitions of light shielding and unit of light measurement (i.e. foot-candle). 1 Exceptions to prohibition on visible light sources include landscape lights such as Malibu lights, front yard lighting intended to illuminate pedestrian and vehicular entries, lighting to accent architectural or landscape features, fossil fuel lights, holiday lights, etc. C. Institute a new performance standard for light trespass of 0.50 foot-candle measured at residential property lines (or where commercial zones abut residential zones), and a 1.0 foot-candle standard between commercial properties. Exempt from these standards are the following: 1. Public recreational uses, since they are typically reviewed through the use permit process to minimize light impacts to surrounding uses and may have restrictions as to lighting hours and/or the number and type of fixtures. 2. Commercial lighting systems and fixtures in place as of the operational date of the Ordinance (December 31, 2004). 3. Street lights, which are reviewed through the subdivision/development review process for consistency with dark sky characteristics of the area while maintaining necessary lighting for safety. XI. Deleted from the CCIP Program A. View blockage from Trees Ordinance B. Upper-Story Setback Requirements C. Incentives for increases to FAR Link to the CCIP Ordinance No :

17 8/26/2015 Item #10F Page 17 Attachment C Mansionization Ordinances Comparative Table

18 8/26/2015 Item #10F Page 18

19 8/26/2015 Item #10F Page 19

20 8/26/2015 Item #10F Page 20

21 8/26/2015 Item #10F Page 21