Title
PLN23-0016 - 1019 Morton Street - Design Review and Variance - Applicant: Donald Thompson. Public hearing to consider Design Review approval for a 1,290 square-foot second-story conversion and addition at the attic space, and a 61 square-foot balcony at the front facade of an existing single-family home. The applicant also requests a Variance to allow further increasing the height of the existing legal-nonconforming 32’ - 6” high roof and the new roof of the addition to be 33’-6” where the maximum height limit is 30 feet. General Plan: Low Density Residential. Zoning: R-1 Residential District. CEQA Determination: This project is a Class 1 categorical exemption and no additional environmental review is necessary pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 (e) - Additions to existing structures.
Body
To: Honorable President
and Members of the Planning Board
From: Andrew Thomas,
Planning, Building and Transportation Director
BACKGROUND
On January 12, 2023, Donald Thomas submitted an application for Design Review to add a second story to an existing Victorian Cottage over a high basement by converting the existing attic space, extending the roof, and adding side facing gables and bay windows. The proposed design also includes a prominent corner turret, and a new balcony at the front façade. The applicant also requested a variance to raise the existing nonconforming 32’ - 6” high roof one additional foot to 33’ - 6” above grade. The proposed additional intersecting roofs would also be raised to 33’ - 6” high. The project is located in the R-1, Residential district where the maximum height limit is 30 feet high. The existing 32-foot 6 inch roof is already non-conforming to the maximum height limit in the R-1 district. Staff supports the proposed design but cannot make the findings to support the variance. As an alternative, staff recommends that the Planning Board approve a modified design that incorporates an extension of the existing roof height of 32’- 6” under AMC Section 30-5.7.m. and interprets the exception to include the side facing gables.
DISCUSSION
The decision before the Planning Board consists of Design Review to allow the construction of a 1,290 square foot addition by converting the existing attic space, extending the existing roof ridge line, and adding side facing gables. In addition, a 61 square foot front balcony and turret is proposed at the front façade. Because the project involves upper story exterior modifications to existing buildings, it requires Design Review approval pursuant to Alameda Municipal Code (AMC) Section 30-37.2.
The proposed design will increase the height of the non-conforming roof from 32’ - 6” to 33’ - 6”, which requires approval of a variance. The proposed extension of the existing roof and the new side gables are also 33’ - 6” high. Since the maximum height allowed in the R-1, Residential Zone is 30 feet the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the additional height for the construction of the addition. In doing so, they would like one extra foot added to the final height of the roof.
Design Review
The proposed design is a second story addition to an existing Victorian Cottage over a high basement that incorporates building elements such as steep roof lines, gables, and bay windows; details such as wood brackets, trim and railings; and materials that include horizontal v-groove wood siding and octagonal wood shingles that are characteristic of the architectural style of the building and the neighboring buildings.
The proposed addition utilizes the existing attic space and extends the roof line by replacing the existing hips with gables at each end. New intersecting side gables are proposed to create additional headroom for the new habitable space. The new roof retains the existing steeply pitched plane typical of the architecture of the building and of the neighboring structures. The addition of a turret at the front corner visually punctuates the massing of the front façade and the front balcony adds a horizontal element that reduces the scale of the new gable behind it as shown on Sheet A12 of the Project Plans. (Exhibit 1.)
The proposed design incorporates architectural elements from the existing 2 story Victorian houses on either side of the property which include a turret and bay windows. The wood siding, trim, brackets, bargeboard, and decorative shingles at the gables are consistent with the materials and features of the existing structure and homes in the neighborhood.
The proposed design meets the requirements of the General Plan, the R-1, Residential District and the City of Alameda Design Review Manual. The addition utilizes architectural elements such as bay windows, a turret, ornate railings, and brackets, to effectively be compatible with the level of detail on the existing building and the other buildings in the neighborhood. The new scale is similar to the adjacent buildings and the massing is visually dynamic with the use of gable roofs, bay windows and an asymmetrical design. The difference in height is negligible from a design perspective, whether it is at the 30-foot height limit, matching the existing roof at 32’ - 6”, or at 33’ - 6” with a variance.
Overall, staff feels that the project is an elevated design that fits in very well with the neighborhood. However, the design of the addition, which increases the height of nonconforming roof another foot, is not compliant with the zoning ordinance, and will require Planning Board approval of a variance of the maximum height limit of 30 feet.
Variance
The necessary findings to approve the project as stated in AMC Section 30-21 are:
1. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applying to the property involved or to the proposed use of the property;
2. Because of such exceptional or extraordinary circumstances, the literal enforcement of specified provisions of this section would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship such as to deprive the applicant of a substantial property right possessed by other owners of property in the same class of district; and
3. The granting of the variance will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to persons or property in the vicinity.
Staff finds that the project does not meet findings 1 and 2 above because there are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances that apply to the subject property, and even if there were, strict compliance with the height limitations would not result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship that would deprive the applicant of a substantial property right. The property is 7,500 square feet (50 feet by 150 feet) and exceeds the minimum lot area for the R-1 district by 2,500 square feet, where the minimum lot area is 5,000 square feet. The use of the property is a single-family home which is consistent with the intended use of the zoning designation. The applicant has expressed a desire to maximize the ceiling height within the attic addition and has requested to raise the roof height by one foot. At the current ridge height of 32’ - 6”, the ceiling height would range from a low of 8’- 4” along the edge of the roof and slope up to 9’ - 6” towards the center of the roof. The ceiling height in the bathroom would range from 7’ - 6” to 9’ - 6 “. The current ridge height already allows ceiling heights to meet or exceed the minimum 7-foot height requirements of the 2022 California Residential Code by at least 6 inches. Therefore, the applicant’s request to further increase the height to 33’ - 6” is, other than for personal preference, unnecessary and does not meet the variance findings for practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships.
Exceptions to Allow Nonconforming Roof Extension
Although staff does not believe the variance findings can be made, staff interprets AMC Section 30-5.7. m. to allow an attic expansion at the existing non-conforming height of 32 feet 6 inches that includes extensions of the existing ridge. Staff also recommends interpretation of the exception to apply to the addition of side gables that are 32’ - 6” high. AMC Section 30-5.7. m. states:
m. Exceptions to Allow Extension of Roof Ridges and Roof Pitch with Heights Greater Than the Maximum Building Height Limitation. If a main building exceeds the maximum building height for the district in which it is located, main building additions may be approved that extend upon the same height roof, ridge, pitch, and plane as the existing roof structure providing that the following findings can be made: (1) no major adverse effects such as significant shading or significant view blockage will occur on adjoining properties relative to existing conditions and relative to an alternative design with the roof extension built in compliance with the maximum building height; (2) the ridge and/or pitch continuation complies with the City of Alameda Building Code.
The exception allows the extension of roof ridges and pitch for building additions that extend upon the same height roof ridge, pitch and plane as the existing roof structure if the main building exceeds the maximum building height for the district. In this case, staff believes this provision applies to the addition since the following findings can be made:
1. No major adverse effects such as significant shading or significant view blockage will occur on adjoining properties relative to existing conditions (i.e., existing roof configuration) and relative to an alternative design with the roof extension built in compliance with the maximum building height: The proposed addition will have no major adverse effects such as significant shading because the subject lot and adjoining lots are large, (7,500 square feet,) and there is approximately 20 feet between the building and neighboring buildings to both the North and South sides of the building. The rear yard setback of approximately 43 feet also provides separation where there are no significant shading impacts on adjoining properties. There are no designated scenic views in the area so view blockage is not an issue for this project.
2. The ridge and/or pitch continuation complies with the City of Alameda Building Code. Continuation of the existing nonconforming roof height of 32’ - 6” for the proposed addition results in bedroom heights ranging from 8’ - 4” to 9’ - 6” and bathroom heights from 7’ - 6” to 9’ - 6”. The design would exceed the 7-foot minimum ceiling height for habitable space by 6 inches as required by the 2022 California Residential Code.
Planning staff interprets this exception to apply to straight additions at the back of the house. However, if the Planning Board interprets this section to allow intersecting gables at the existing nonconforming height of 32 feet 6 inches, this could accommodate the project and create opportunities for other homeowners to create habitable attic space. In such case, staff believes the Planning Board could make the findings above to approve a modified design that incorporates both straight and perpendicular extensions of the existing roof height of 32’-6” under AMC Section 30-5.7. m.
Conclusion
In summary, staff finds that the proposed project meets all the findings for Design Review approval but does not meet all the findings for a Variance to the maximum height limit of the R-1 district.
Staff recommends the Planning Board approve the Design Review application with the exception set forth in AMC 30-5.7. m. This will allow the addition to continue at the existing 32-foot 6-inch height. The applicant will need to revise their plans prior to issuance of a building permit, so that the addition is one foot lower to match the existing roof height at 32 feet 6 inches.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 (e) which allows additions to existing structures provided that the addition will not result in an increase of more than: (2) 10,000 square feet if: (A) The project is in an area where all public services and facilities are available to allow for maximum development permissible in the General Plan and (B) The area in which the project is located is not environmentally sensitive. The project complies with these criteria, and none of the exceptions to the exemption apply.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Property owners and residents within 300 feet of the project’s boundaries were notified of the public hearing and given the opportunity to review and comment on the proposal.
RECOMMENDATION
Hold a public hearing and approve Design Review application PLN23-0016 based on the findings and subject to the conditions of approval as stated in the Draft Resolution (Exhibit 2).
Respectfully Submitted,
Allen Tai, City Planner
By,
Deirdre McCartney, Planner II
Exhibits:
1. Project Plans
2. Draft Resolution