Meeting Time: August 20, 2019 at 7:00pm PDT
The online Comment window has expired

Agenda Item

11. REPORT 19-0542 A-14#63- Planning Commission consideration of a small lot exception to open space and lot coverage requirements otherwise required in the Single-Family Residential (R-1) zone for a new single-family residence at 3411 The Strand, and determination that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

  • Default_avatar
    Jim Hamilton 25 days ago

    1. The proposed home is maxed out with west wall setback only 6'6" from the Strand. This is closer to the Strand than almost every other home in this section of the Strand. Our home next door is set back 9'10" across most of our west exposure except for our bay windows which cover 11' of our west wall on both floors. They extend 20" from our west wall, but are still set back over 8' from the Strand.
    2. Proposed home will have a second floor balcony stretching totally across the west side, extending 2'6" into the setback area, extending to within 4' of the Strand. The vast majority of homes in our neighborhood do not have balconies extending totally across their west side and are set back further from the Strand. Thus, the second floor balcony will be out of character for our neighborhood. Respectfully, the request to allow this balcony as proposed should be denied. Its intrusion into the 300 sq. ft patio below should operate to reduce the open space credit for that patio.
    3. The proposed 2nd floor balcony will also intrude into and interfere with our views to the southwest out of our bay windows. Possibly this negative impact could be reduced by angling that corner of the balcony at a 45 degree angle, which would also create more true open space for the patio below.
    4. The plans depict 3 square objects intruding into the 3'6" setback on the north side of the home. These objects are probably HVAC units which appear to extend 24-30" into this setback area, less than 1'6" from the property line. That should not be approved due to their size, impingement into the setback area and attendant noise.

    Respectfully submitted,
    Jim and Janet Hamilton