Title
PLN160608 - BAILEY
(Continued from October 26, 2017, December 13, 2017 and February 28, 2018)
Public hearing to consider the remodel of an existing one-story, single family dwelling adding 3,852 total square feet and 5,928 square feet of new and re-paved areas within 100 feet of environmentally sensitive habitat area (ESHA: Monterey Cypress habitat, Monterey Pine, Coast Live Oak)
Project Location: 3257 17 Mile Drive, Pebble Beach, Del Monte Forest Land Use Plan
Proposed CEQA action: Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration
Report
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution to:
1) Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration
2) Approve a Combined Development Permit consisting of:
a. Coastal Administrative Permit and Design Approval for 2,717 square feet of additions to a to an existing single family dwelling and a 1,135-square foot, attached 3-car garage; and
b. Coastal Development Permit to allow development within 100 feet of Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area.
3) Adopting a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
The attached draft resolution includes findings and evidence for consideration (Exhibit D). Staff recommends approval subject to 23 conditions of approval, including 9 mitigation measures.
PROJECT INFORMATION:
Agent: John Moore
Property Owners: Caroline C. Bailey
APN: 008-461-010-000
Parcel Size: 1.24 acres (53,884 square feet)
Zoning: LDR/2.5-D (CZ)
Plan Area: Del Monte Forest Land Use Plan
Flagged and Staked: Yes
SUMMARY:
The project is located at 3257 17-Mile Drive in a Low Density Residential zone with no special height restrictions. This proposal would modify an existing 1,903 square foot hybrid Spanish Revival/Monterey Colonial style, single family dwelling set within a closed-cone conifer forest composed of Coast Live Oak, Monterey Pine, and Monterey Cypress. Additions include 2,717 square feet of single story additions, an attached 1,135 square foot 3-car garage, demolition and replacement of paved areas and a new driveway gate; colors and materials to match the existing structure. A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared for this project. Potential impacts to Biological Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources were identified for which nine mitigation measures were incorporated. Eight of the nine mitigation measures address impacts to Biological Resources. The final mitigation measure is an expression of an in-person consultation with the Ohlone/Costanoan-Esselen Nation (OCEN) Chairperson. Although there were no initial concerns with archaeological resources (given the results of the archaeological report), the parcel is located within a high archaeological sensitivity zone and is near 14 previously recorded archaeological sites (within one kilometer). Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1, the Legislature finds and declares that California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with a geographic area may have expertise concerning their tribal cultural resources. Under Assembly Bill No. 52, as part of the consultation pursuant to 21080.3.1, the parties may propose mitigation measures, including, but not limited to, those recommended in Section 21084.3, capable of avoiding or substantially lessening potential significant impacts to a tribal cultural resource or alternatives that would avoid significant impacts to a tribal cultural resource. With the understanding that there is a distinction between archaeological and tribal cultural resources, staff incorporated a mitigation measure which would mitigate potential impacts to tribal cultural resources to a less than significant level. A standard condition (Condition No. 3) for incidental discovery of archaeological resources has also been applied to the project. The applicant is not in agreement with the final mitigation measure, however, staff will recommend that the contract with the tribal monitor be limited to ground disturbance activities and not be part of the larger project.
DISCUSSION:
Project History. This project came before the Planning Commission on October 25, 2017 with the intent of determining whether Policy 20 applied to this parcel and the options available thereafter. At this hearing, the Planning Commission found that the parcel was not subject to Policy 20, however, the Planning Commission contended that the categorical exemptions identified by staff for this project (CEQA Sections 15301 and 15303) posed issues and should be substantiated by staff. On December 13, 2017, staff returned to the Planning Commission to outline the reasoning to go forward with further environmental review (Initial Study) and to request a continuance to provide staff sufficient time to analyze potential impacts. Staff found that although the project was not subject to Policy 20, it was subject to an exception to the Class 1 exemption under CEQA Section 15300.2 [Exceptions] because the additions would result in an increase of more than 50 percent of the floor area and would be located in an environmentally sensitive habitat area/particularly sensitive environment which had the potential of having a significant cumulative effect (historical, biological, visual concerns). Staff’s decision to proceed with further environmental review was contested by the applicant (Exhibit M). Staff continued this item to a date certain: February 28, 2018. On February 28, 2018, however, staff had not completed the Initial Study and requested a continuance to allow for additional time to complete the Initial Study and circulate the document for a 20-day review period due to the fact that there were no state agencies requiring review of the Initial Study. At the time of writing this report, the Initial Study was still in the public domain and staff had not received comments.
Project Issues:
ESHA. The Parcel is situated to the east of 17-Mile Drive, south of Cypress Point, in a developed residential neighborhood. A portion of the parcel falls within the area of the Del Monte Forest delineated as indigenous Monterey Cypress habitat, while the rest of the site falls outside of this mapped boundary per the Del Monte Forest Land Use Plan (“Monterey Cypress Forest, Figure 2a”/Exhibit G). The Del Monte Forest Land Use Plan’s Policy 20 identifies the indigenous Monterey Cypress habitat as environmentally sensitive habitat area (ESHA) and specifically regulates use and development in or adjacent to indigenous Monterey cypress habitat areas. The policy requires development to be compatible with the objective of protecting this environmentally sensitive coastal resource. The proposed new development falls fully outside the area marked as Cypress habitat, however, it is still adjacent to individual Monterey Cypresses, Monterey Pine trees, and Coast Live Oaks. Policy 20, as approved in 2012, suggested that only remodels which stay within existing hardscape footprints can be approved. The strict interpretation of Policy 20 had the undesired consequence of rejecting reasonable projects that can be mitigated or conditioned to conserve and protect on-the-ground resources. The County’s current effort to clarify and amplify development standards within developed and undeveloped lots adjacent to ESHA is summarized below.
On December 6, 2016, the Board of Supervisors adopted a Resolution of Intent (Board Resolution of Intent No. 16-321) to amend the text of the Del Monte Forest Area Land Use Plan and to adopt an ordinance to amend the text of Section 20.147.040.D.2 of the Coastal Implementation Plan regulating development within the indigenous Monterey cypress habitat. On May 10, 2017, the California Coastal Commission approved the LCP amendment with modifications coordinated between Coastal Commission and County staff.
The proposed amendment to Policy 20, as recently approved by the California Coastal Commission, restores limited flexibility for development to modify existing legal hardscape footprints but clarifies and refines these circumstances to assure the outcome is a material net enhancement of Cypress habitat which does not harm individual Cypress trees. The proposed amendment codifies best management practices to ensure protection - and enhancement - of this special resource area including:
• Coordinating biological and arborist reports with input from the Del Monte Forest Conservancy;
• Requiring restoration to promote germination;
• Making development siting discretionary to avoid the most sensitive habitat areas;
• Only recognizing existing legal hardscape as opposed to unpermitted hardscape;
• Requiring alternative construction methods to avoid Cypress tree impacts; and
• Requiring preconstruction meetings to ensure Cypress protection conditions are properly implemented.
On parcels which have been previously developed, the proposed amendment to Policy 20 further clarifies that projects may minimally alter their existing legal hardscape/footprint if the overall project will materially improve existing Monterey cypress habitat. For example:
• Does not harm any individual Monterey cypress tree
• Increases Monterey cypress habitat area on site by significantly reducing net hardscape;
• Restores the remaining Monterey cypress habitat area on the subject parcel;
• Places development within a defined and surveyed development envelope, and places Monterey cypress habitat area into a permanent conservation easement; and
• Funds off-site mitigation to improve Monterey cypress habitat.
Staff contacted the California Coastal Commission to get a consensus on their treatment of parcels in Figure 2a. Coastal Commission staff provided correspondence stating that their position on parcels that are half in and half out of the mapped ESHA boundary (Figure 2a), is that the LCP’s cypress habitat protection policies would only apply to the area that is within the mapped area and not the whole parcel. Therefore, the Bailey project is exempt from language in Policy 20.
Although exempt from Policy 20, there are other current policies in the Del Monte Forest Land Use Plan (DMF LUP) which do apply to the Bailey project and provide some guidance for development adjacent to ESHA. For example, policy numbers 8, 11, and 14, include language permitting the following: “development of parcels immediately adjacent to environmentally sensitive habitat areas shall be planned to keep development intensity as low as possible” and “land disturbance shall be restricted to the minimum amount necessary to accommodate reasonable development.” While there is room for interpretation and discretion regarding the concepts “low as possible” and “reasonable development,” the LUP is clear about the analysis required prior to approval of a project via Policy 12. Specifically, Policy 12 requires applicants to retain qualified individuals to conduct field surveys and impact analysis to precisely determine habitat area locations and to recommend siting, design, and related mitigating measures to ensure protection of any sensitive species or habitat areas present. The applicant submitted reports accordingly and in combination with an Initial Study, staff was able to find that impacts to the biological and tribal cultural resources are less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Staff conducted a site visit on September 8, 2017 and could confirm that staking and flagging is in a previously disturbed area and that certain impacted trees (#277, #223, and #224) are within a heavily landscaped or otherwise disturbed area (Exhibit J). No landmark or protected trees are slated for removal and all existing trees in the project area will be protected according to the arborist’s recommendations. None of the animal taxa detected onsite or nearby is listed by either the federal or state governments as Threatened or Endangered. Previous tree removal not associated with this project was performed with County-approved tree permits. Approximately .341 acres of disturbance are projected for this project; excavation work will involve less than 550 cubic yards.
To better meet the policies of the DMF LUP, a condition to convey undeveloped portions of the property has been applied to the project. Presently, no portion of the Bailey property is in a conservation easement. In adherence with DMF LUP Policy No. 13, environmentally sensitive habitat areas shall be protected through deed restrictions or permanent open space conservation and scenic easements granted to the Del Monte Forest Conservancy (DMFC). The DMFC was contacted by staff and has agreed to accept the conveyance subject to the applicant paying the processing and monitoring fees. The retained biologist identifies an appropriate area to be the uphill, eastern one-third of the property, extending from above the proposed garage to the back fence and from the north to south borders. This proposed area would be contiguous with the Pebble Beach Company easement/trail along the northern boundary line. The project has been conditioned to adhere to this policy (Condition No. 12/MM #6).
Because the parcel is not subject to Policy 20, the applicant will not be required to restore Monterey Cypress habitat or fund off-site mitigation to improve Monterey cypress habitat. Instead the following mitigation measures were incorporated to mitigate impacts to a less than significant level to Biological Resources:
MM#1: Monitoring of Grading and Construction Activities
MM#2: Best Management Practices
MM#3: General Tree Protection Standards
MM#4: Tree Protection Standards During Grading and Excavation
MM#5: Tree Pruning Guidelines
MM#6: Permanent Conservation Easement
MM#7: Deer Movement/Wildlife Movement
MM#8: Protection of Reptiles, Wildlife Friendly Netting Designs and Practices
Historic Resource. The Bailey residence was constructed in 1924 and follows a Spanish Revival Style reflective of the architectural construction of the period in Pebble Beach. Although PAST Consultants’ historian, Seth Bergstein, could not locate original drawings nor identify the architect for this home, it is his expert opinion that the Bailey property is a clear representation of Mediterranean-or Spanish Revival styles expressed during 1919-1945, when the Del Monte Properties Company imposed strict design controls. The single-family dwelling has been altered through the years and because of this, Mr. Bergstein was concerned about the remaining historic integrity. To explore this matter, John Scourkes, AIA, chair of the Historic Resources Review Board, was invited to view the structure and discuss the client’s plans for alterations. From this meeting, it was decided that although the building would not to be eligible for the National or California Registers because of the previous modifications made to the building, it is eligible under the local Monterey County Historic Register under Criterions B1 and B3. According to the historian, the residence is eligible under the B1 criterion because the architecture communicates the Spanish Revival Style as specified by the Del Monte Forest Properties Company in the 1920s; and Criterion B3 because of its retention of enough character-defining features to communicate the Spanish Revival Style.
The remaining character-defining features include:
• Monterey Colonial-style front veranda on squared columns, with square-post balustrade and brick paving on west elevation;
• Multi-pane casement windows and shutters of west elevation;
• Spanish Revival-style chimney and details on north elevation; and
• Clay barrel-tile roof
Per the historian’s research, the applicable theme is “Samuel Morse and the Del Monte Properties Company 1919-1945” (Pebble Beach Historic Context Statement). The proposed project’s additions will conform to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and was designed with the historic eligibility in mind. According to the historian’s evaluation of the proposed alterations, the project will not cause a significant impact to the environment, according to the California Environmental Quality Act (14 CCR § 15126.4(b)(1)), allowing the building to maintain its historic integrity. Staff finds that all the additions and alterations to the Bailey residence will be consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for historic rehabilitation, per CEQA Guidelines Section 15331 and with Monterey County Code, Chapter 18.25.070.
This project was placed on the Historic Resources Review Board (HRRB) agenda on October 5, 2017 for review. To address the HRRB’s concerns regarding how best to differentiate the new additions from the existing historic structure, the plans show that the proposed fenestration pattern of the mullions will be altered. HRRB members were receptive to the design and unanimously voted to approve the project as proposed (5-Ayes, 2-Absent, see Exhibit E).
An Initial Study/Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (Exhibit L) was prepared and circulated for public review from March 7, 2018 to March 26, 2017. Potential impacts to Biological Resources and Cultural Resources were identified. Mitigation measures proposed are designed to: protect trees and nesting birds during construction, implement construction best management practices, monitor the site during soil-disturbing activities, manage the discovery of tribal cultural resources during construction, and protect biological resources through an easement. The impacts are mitigated to a less-than-significant level through the implementation of these mitigation measures.
Due to the subject property’s proximity to known sites and identification of marine shell deposits, OCEN recommends that all earth disturbance activities be monitored by a Native American Monitor of the Ohlone/Costanoan-Esselen Nation, approved by the OCEN Tribal Council within their aboriginal territory. Staff finds it reasonable to limit monitoring to ground disturbing activities to mitigate impacts to tribal cultural resources to a less than significant level.
Visual Resources. Per the Del Monte Forest Land Use Plan, (“Visual Resources, Figure 3”), the subject parcel has visual sensitivity (sensitive). In the DMF-LUP, 17-Mile Drive is also designated a “scenic corridor” and allows for development that does not block significant public views. All of the proposed development for this project will be away from scenic 17-Mile Drive, sloped upward from the road. The proposed additions to the existing single family dwelling (3,852 total square feet of additions), including an attached garage, will have limited visibility from the scenic corridor. Existing vegetation and tree cover will continue to screen the development. More importantly, the proposed project siting (rear of existing structure) and the vantage of a sloped-up driveway will further shield the additions.
The existing stone wall will be repaired and in some places replaced with the same material. A new gate, an infill metal design, will replace the wrought iron gate with see-through openings. The applicant will submit photos or samples of the materials to be used to assure that the proposed gate does not include reflective materials that would impact the public viewshed. The proposed gate/garden wall behind the existing stone wall will be excluded from this project because it would impact aesthetics. The Del Monte Forest Coastal Implementation Plan states that fences shall be designed with see-through materials or spaced in a manner to protect views of the natural habitat from 17-Mile Drive. The applicant shall submit revised plans to be in conformance with site development standards for the Del Monte Forest.
The County of Monterey requires that all exterior lighting for the proposed project be unobtrusive and harmonious with the local area. Based on this policy, a condition of approval shall be included to require the applicant to submit an exterior lighting plan prior to the issuance of building permits for review and approval by the RMA-Planning Department to ensure that only the intended areas are illuminated and off-site glare is fully controlled.
SETBACKS
Staff finds that the proposed project meets or exceeds all of the development standards (height, setbacks, coverage, etc.) for this area:
Main Structure Setback and Height Requirements:
Front Setback: 30 feet (minimum)
Side Setback: 20 feet (minimum)
Rear Setback: 20 feet (minimum)
Maximum height: 30 feet
The Bailey project proposal meets all standards as detailed below:
Front Setback: 80+ feet
Side Setbacks: 20.3 and 33.7 feet
Rear Setback: 82.2 feet
Maximum Height: less than 20 feet
PARKING
Pursuant to Chapter 20.58 (Regulations for Parking) under Monterey County Zoning Ordinance Title 20, all residential developments shall have at least 1 covered parking space; covered parking shall count toward the two (2) required parking spaces. The project proposes to add a three-car garage. Therefore, this project meets the parking requirements listed under Residential Use.
On May 11, 2017, the Del Monte Forest Architectural Review Board (ARB), considered the preliminary plans for the Bailey project (at the time the proposal included a detached three-car garage) and approved the project with six (6) standard conditions (Exhibit K).
The proposed project is consistent with the Del Monte Forest Land Use Plan policies and the site development standards required for LDR/2.5 zoning (MCC, Title 20). Therefore, staff recommends approval of the project.
CEQA
Monterey County RMA-Planning prepared an Initial Study pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. The Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (“MND”) for PLN160608 was prepared in accordance with CEQA and circulated for public review from March 7, 2018 through March 26, 2018.
Issues that were analyzed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration include: aesthetics, agriculture and forest resources, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology/soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards/hazardous materials, hydrology/water quality, land use/planning, mineral resources, noise, population/housing, public services, recreation, transportation/traffic, tribal cultural resources, and utility/service systems.
Staff identified less than significant impacts with mitigation incorporated to Tribal Cultural and Biological resources. Staff has made the necessary findings to approve the project subject to twenty-three (23) conditions which includes nine (9) mitigation measures (Exhibit D.1).
A Condition Compliance and Mitigation Monitoring and/or Reporting Plan has been prepared in accordance with Monterey County regulations, is designed to ensure compliance during project implementation. The applicant must enter into an “Agreement to Implement a Mitigation Monitoring and/or Reporting Program” (Condition No. 17).
OTHER AGENCY INVOLVEMENT:
The following agencies have reviewed the project, have comments, and/or have recommended conditions:
RMA-Public Works
RMA-Environmental Services
Water Resources Agency
Pebble Beach CSD
Del Monte Forest Land Use Advisory Committee
Historic Resources Review Board
Del Monte Forest Architectural Review Board
California Coastal Commission
The proposed project was reviewed by the Del Monte Forest LUAC on September 5th and voted 4 ayes, 0 noes, and 3 absent, to approve the new additions as proposed with colors and materials to match the existing home. On the same day, the Historic Resources Review Board also voted unanimously to approve the project as proposed.
Prepared by: Maira Blanco, Assistant Planner, x5052
Reviewed by: Brandon Swanson, RMA Services Manager
Approved by: Carl Holm, AICP, RMA Director
The following attachments are on file with the RMA:
Exhibit A - Project Data Sheet
Exhibit B - Historic Assessments (LIB170209)
Exhibit C - Vicinity Map
Exhibit D - Resolution
• Conditions of approval
• Plans
• Colors and Materials
Exhibit E - Historic Resources Review Board Resolution No. 160608
Exhibit F - DMF-LUAC Minutes, October 5, 2017
Exhibit G - DMF LUP Figure 2a
Exhibit H - Biotic Report (LIB170360), August 14, 2017
Exhibit I - Tree Resource Assessment (LIB170359), July 17, 2017
Exhibit J - Staff Photos, site visit conducted on September 8, 2017
Exhibit K - Del Monte Forest ARB (Pebble Beach Company)
Exhibit L - Tree Removal Permits
Exhibit M- Letter from Anthony Lombardo, Esq.
cc: Front Counter Copy; Planning Commission; Brandon Swanson, RMA Services Manager; Maira Blanco, Project Planner; John Moore, agent; Caroline C. Bailey, property owner; The Open Monterey Project (Molly Erickson); LandWatch (Executive Director); John H. Farrow; Janet Brennan; Project File PLN160608.