Title
PLN240362 - KSHIRE PROPERTY INVESTMENTS, LLC
Public Hearing to consider:
a. Appeals by Carol Bernstein, and Sebastian Miller and Sarah Miller of the August 27, 2026, Zoning Administrator’s Resolution approving a Combined Development Permit and water allocation; and
b. Find the project qualifies for Class 1 and Class 3 Categorical Exemptions pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines sections 15301 and 15303, and there are no exceptions to either Exemption under Section 15300.2; and
c. Approve the demolition of an existing 646 square foot single-family dwelling, and construction of a 2,531 square foot single family dwelling with an attached 263 square foot garage, and an 800 square foot attached accessory dwelling unit, with associated site improvements including development within 750 feet of archaeological resources, removal of three oak trees, and water allocation not to exceed 0.159-acre feet of water per year (AFY) for the single family dwelling from the County’s “First Come, First Served” category and water allocation not to exceed 0.101 AFY for accessory dwelling unit from the County’s “Planned Housing Growth” category pursuant to Board Policy No. G-269.
Body
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the County of Monterey Board of Supervisors adopt a resolution to:
1) Deny the appeals of Carol Bernstein, and Sebastian Miller and Sarah Miller of the August 27, 2026, Zoning Administrator’s Resolution approving a Combined Development Permit and water allocation;
2) Find the project qualifies for a Class 1 and a Class 3 Categorical Exemption pursuant to CEQA Guidelines sections 15301 and 15303, and there are no applicable exceptions to either Exemptions under Section 15300.2;
3) Approve the Combined Development Permit consisting of a:
a. Coastal Administrative Permit and Design Approval to allow the demolition of an existing 646 square foot single-family dwelling, construction of a 2,531 square foot single family dwelling with an attached 263 square foot garage and associated site improvements;
b. Coastal Administrative Permit and Design Approval to allow the construction of an 800 square foot attached accessory dwelling unit;
c. Coastal Administrative Permit to allow development within 750 square feet of known archaeological resources; and
d. Coastal Development Permit to allow the removal of 3 Oak trees.
4) Approve a water allocation not to exceed 0.159-acre feet of water per year (AFY) for the single-family dwelling from the County’s “First Come, First Served” category and water allocation not to exceed 0.101 AFY for accessory dwelling unit from the County’s “Planned Housing Growth” category pursuant to Board Policy No. G-269.
The attached draft resolution includes findings and evidence for consideration (Attachment A). Staff recommends approval subject to 16 conditions of approval.
PROJECT INFORMATION:
Agent: Carla Hashimoto
Property Owner: Kshire Property Investments LLC
APN: 009-383-012-000
Parcel Size: 0.15 acres
Zoning: Medium Density Residential with a gross density of 2 units per acre with a Design Control Overlay within the Coastal Zone or “MDR/2-D(CZ)”
Plan Area: Carmel Area Land Use Plan
Flagged and Staked: Yes
Project Planner: Imani Harrigan
harrigani@countyofmonterey.gov, 831-755-5845
SUMMARY:
The property is located at 2755 15th Avenue, a public County maintained road, in the Carmel Land Use Plan area of the unincorporated area of the County of Monterey. The parcel is zoned Medium Density Residential, 2 acres per unit, and Design Control overlay, or “MDR/2-D”. The proposed project involves the demolition of an existing 646 square foot single family dwelling and construction of a 2,531 square foot single family dwelling with an attached 263 square foot garage, and an 800 square foot attached accessory dwelling unit (ADU) with associated site improvements, development) within 750 feet of known archaeological resources and removal of 3 Oak trees. Associate site improvements include a 263 square foot driveway, 131 square foot steppingstones, patio with an outdoor cooking area, covered porches and landscaping. Implementation of the project would require 20 cubic yards of cut and 55 cubic yards of fill. Potable water will be provided to the parcel by California American Water through the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District (MPWMD) with the request of water allocation from the County, and wastewater will be handled by the Carmel Area Wastewater District.
On August 27, 2026, at a duly noticed public hearing, the County of Monterey Zoning Administrator approved the project, subject to 14 conditions of approval. On September 3, 2026, two separate appeals were timely filed by Carol Bernstein (Appeal No. 1), and by Sebastion Miller, and Sarah Miller (Appeal No. 2) of the Zoning Administrator’s decision to approve the project. The appeals (Attachments G & H) contend that the decision was procedurally defective and incompatible with the Carmel Land Use Plan policies. The specific contentions are further detailed below and in Attachment A (Draft Resolution).
Per Monterey County Code (MCC) section 20.86.070, this hearing is de novo. Staff has prepared a draft resolution recommending that the County of Monterey Board of Supervisors deny the appeal, find the proposed use Categorically Exempt from CEQA Guidelines, and approve the Combined Development Permit and water allocation subject to the conditions outlined in Attachment A.
DISCUSSION:
Appeal No. 1 by Carol Bernstein
The appellant, Carol Bernstein, filed an appeal with five contentions (Attachment H), which staff has summarized below:
1. Public comment letters were emailed to staff for the Carmel Unincorporated/Highlands Land Use Advisory Committee (LUAC) that were not included in the meeting minutes.
2. The proposed single-family dwelling and ADU does not comply with neighborhood character due to siting, massing, and structural height.
3. The Zoning Administrator failed to apply architectural mitigations to protect the Appellant’s privacy due to second story floor of the proposed single-family dwelling facing a private outdoor deck and yard space.
4. The County failed to require a ballon test of physical story poles prior to approval. The bulk and scale do not comply with single-story character of the specific block on 15th Avenue.
5. Removing three native Oak trees while simultaneously building a massive structural footprint violates the protective viewshed policies of the Carmel Land Use Plan.
Appeal No.1 Response
Staff has considered the appeal contentions and provides the following responses. In summary, staff finds the approval of the project consistent with applicable County policy and regulations in this case (see the discussion below).
Response to Contention 1: On July 2, 2026, Carol Bernstein emailed a comment letter to the Carmel Unincorporated/Highlands LUAC. The LUAC meeting on July 6, 2026, was continued due to the staking and flagging not yet being installed. The meeting was subsequently scheduled and re-noticed for August 3, 2026. The meetings were publicly noticed to the property owners within 300 feet of the subject property. Although no additional public comment was made at each of the meetings, staff inadvertently did not distribute the letter for LUAC for consideration. The public comment letter (Attachment E) included concerns about the bulk and mass of the proposed development, the privacy implications on adjacent properties, the lack of story-poles, the history of drainage issues, and the overall neighborhood compatibility. Nonetheless, these concerns have either been addressed through design and/or are sufficiently protected by applicable County regulations (see responses and discussion below). The project is consistent with the design and visual resource policies of the 1982 General Plan, Carmel Area Land Use Plan, Carmel Area Coastal Implementation Plan and applicable regulations within the MCC Title 20.
Response to Contention 2: According to Title 20 section 20.12.060.C.1, the site development standards permit main structures to have a front setback of 20 feet, side setback of 5 feet, and a maximum height of 30 feet. Pursuant to Title 20 section 20.64.030.E. 3 newly constructed accessory dwelling units (ADUs) shall comply with front setback requirements of the applicable zoning district four foot minimum side and rear setbacks. In accordance with Title 20 section 20.62.040 any accessory structure attached to the main structure shall be subject to the same height requirements as the main structure. Additionally, Section 20.64.030.E.3 requires four foot rear and side setbacks. The proposed 2,531 square foot single-family dwelling with an attached 263 garage, and attached 800 square feet ADU complies with these standards. There are 13 single-family dwellings in Block 7 as shown on map entitled “Map of First Addition to Mission Tract”. Nine of the single-family dwellings are two-story homes, with single-family dwellings having an existing height of approximately 28 feet. In addition, nine of the single-family dwellings are approximately at least 2,000 square feet, with the overall range for single-family dwellings in Block 7 between 1,300 square feet to 4,000 square feet. Therefore, the project mass and size is consistent with the average size of the neighborhood.
Response to Contention 3: The County does not protect private views of property owners. The County does have regulations as it pertains to visual resources and design. As discussed below, the application complies with the policies and regulations.
Response to Contention 4: The subject parcel is in a Design Control district and therefore requires staking and flagging pursuant to Board Policy No. 09 - 360. Although the application did not have the staking and flagging up for the initial LUAC meeting on July 6, 2026, the staking and flagging was present for the subsequent meeting on August 3, 2026, and the duly noticed Zoning Administrator hearing on August 27, 2026. Staff found the staking and flagging was adequate to demonstrate the dimensions of the proposed application.
Response to Contention 5: Under Carmel Area Land Use Plan, Policy 2.2.3, structures shall be located and designed to minimize tree removal and grading for the building site and access road. The three Coast Live Oak trees are either directly within or adjacent to the building footprint. The three trees proposed for removal are not landmark trees. Staff considered a configuration that shifted the house back toward the rear property line a few feet to preserve the three Oak trees; however, a configuration closer to the rear property line would not comply with the rear setback requirements. The application includes a an 800 square foot ADU, or “State-Exempt” and pursuant to Government Section code 66323. Additionally, staff considered a configuration that decreased the square footage in the front of the residence to preserve the three Oak trees. However, such a configuration would be infeasible because, as discussed in the Geotechnical Report, the site should be cleared of non-engineered fill, and the compacted subgrade should extend laterally by 2 feet of any proposed improvements. Therefore, even if the house were shifted or reduced in square footage, the roots of these three trees would potentially be impacted. In this case, the proposed tree removal is the minimum required.
Appeal No. 2 by Sebastian and Sarah Miller
The appellant, Sebastian and Sarah Miller, filed an appeal with five contentions (Attachment I), summarized below:
1. Public comment letters were emailed to staff for the Carmel Unincorporated/Highlands Land Use Advisory Committee (LUAC) that were not included in the meeting minutes.
2. The subject property has unresolved concerns regarding flooding, drainage and stormwater runoff.
3. The story-poles were not installed prior to the initial LUAC scheduled meeting, depriving the neighborhood of a fair opportunity to see the proposed design.
4. The County’s water allocation raises concerns related to the water-credit allocation processes and equity.
5. Concerns for the potential for mature oak trees to be removed during construction.
Appeal No. 2 Response
Staff has considered the appeal contentions and provides the following responses. In summary, staff finds the approval of the project consistent with applicable County policy and regulations (see the discussion below).
Response to Contention No. 1: See Response to Appeal No. 1, Contention No. 1.
Response to Contention No. 2: Although the project will increase the subject property’s impervious surface coverage, the applicant is installing new drainage improvements such as catch basins, area drains, downspouts, and storm drains. HCD - Engineering Services applied Condition No. 10 (Attachment A.1), which requires the Applicant/Owner to improve the existing drainage along the property frontages. The Applicant/Owner shall submit designs for review and approval to obtain an encroachment permit prior to issuance of building or grading permits, and to construct and complete improvements prior to occupancy or commencement of use.
Response to Contention No. 3: See Responses to Appeal No. 1, Contentions No. 1 and 2.
Response to Contention No. 4: The Applicant/Owner completed Monterey Peninsula Water Management District Residential Water Release Forms and Water Permit Applications. Pursuant to Board Policy No. G-269, the First Come, First Served category permits a maximum of 0.25 acre feet of water per year (25 fixture units). The existing single-family has a 6.8 existing fixture unit count and the Applicant/Owner is proposing a total fixture unit count of 22.7, which is less than the maximum 25 fixture unit count. Pursuant to Board Policy No. G-269, the Planning Housing Growth category, the Applicant/Owner is allowed a maximum of 12 fixture units for ADUs, and the applicant is proposing a total fixture unit count of 10.1 fixtures. Therefore, consistent with the Board Policy, the project for each unit qualifies for the water allocation.
Response to Contention No. 5: The project would be conditioned for the applicant adequately protecting for any remaining trees to be during construction or grading activities (Condition No. 5). Prior to the issuance of any grading and/or building permits, evidence must be provided to the County that trees close to any construction activities are properly protected. If there is any potential for damage, all work must stop and applicants must provide a report from a certified arborist with appropriate mitigation measures.
Land Use Advisory Committee Procedures
The amendments to the Monterey County Land Use Advisory Committee procedures were adopted on November 18, 2008, and amended on December 16, 2014, through Board Policy Resolution No. 15-043. The purpose of the Land Use Advisory Committee is to:
1. Advise the Appropriate Authority by providing comments and recommendations on referred land use planning matters pursuant to the “Guidelines for Review of Applications” in Exhibit A to Board Policy Resolution No. 15-043.
2. Reflect the perspective of the local community with focus on neighborhood character, unique community site and conditions and potential local effects or contributions that would likely result from the implementation of a proposed project.
3. Perform such other review of land issues as may be requested from time to time by the Planning Commission or the Board of Supervisors.
4. Provide a venue for project neighbors to provide input on proposed projects.
5. Identify concerns in response to staff-provided scopes of review on neighborhood, community and site issues excluding regional impacts which are the purview of the Appropriate Authority.
Simply put, the Land Use Advisory Committee is a meeting for local community members to participate in the review and public hearing process for County projects by providing advice to the Appropriate Authority, in this case the Zoning Administrator. The Appellants’ public comment letters were inadvertently excluded from being distributed to the LUAC members; however, the concerns raised in the letters were adequately addressed during the review of the project and conditioned as applicable. The LUAC is the advisory body for applications that meet certain criteria. The County of Monterey is the appropriate hearing authority for the application. Opportunity for public testimony at both the LUAC meetings and the County of Monterey Zoning Administrator was taken. The project was reviewed by the Carmel Unincorporated/Highland LUAC on August 3, 2026. On August 3, 2026, the committee recommended support as proposed by a vote of 4-0, with one member absent. The application was reviewed and approved by the County of Monterey Zoning Administrator on August 27, 2026.
Based on staff’s analysis, the proposed project is consistent with the policies and regulations pertaining to zoning uses and any other applicable provisions of the 1982 Monterey County General Plan (General Plan), Carmel Land Use Plan (CAR LUP), Carmel Area Coastal Implementation Policy Part 4 (CIP), and applicable sections of the Monterey County Coastal zoning ordinance (Title 20).
Design and Visual Resources
The subject property includes a Design Control Overlay. Title 20, Chapter 20.44 establishes regulations for Design Control zoning, or “D” districts, to help regulate the location, size, configuration, materials, and colors of structures and fences to assure the protection of neighborhood character. Residences within the vicinity of the project site align with a blended range of architectural styles, inclusive of suburban mediterranean-style homes with cream exterior finishes, to craftsman-style cottage homes and simple modern beach houses, all with visible influences of mid-century modern design. The proposed single-family dwelling would have a craftsman architectural style, consisting of earthly tones including olive engineered siding, provincial wood windows, aspen cedar shake roofing, dark brown metal gutters and downspouts, and Victoria stone pavers with, bronze FXLuminaire lighting, and rafter tails. The property is surrounded by existing mature vegetation and other developed lots with single-family residences.
Consistent with CAR LUP Policy 2.2.2 and CAR CIP section 20.146.030.C.1.d, the project has been designed, sited, and conditioned to ensure minimal visibility from any scenic areas. The proposed exterior finishes would not detract from the surrounding natural environment and would be consistent with the surrounding residential neighborhood character. Therefore, as designed, sited, and conditioned, the project assures protection of the public viewshed, is consistent with neighborhood character, and assures visual integrity as outlined in the CAR LUP, CAR CIP and Title 20. Additionally, General Plan Policy 26.1.20 requires that all exterior lighting be both unobtrusive and constructed or located so that only the intended area is illuminated, long-range visibility is reduced of the lighting source, and off-site glare is fully controlled. Therefore, a standard condition of approval (Condition No. 9) has been applied to ensure that all exterior lighting is down-lit, unobtrusive, and harmonious with the area.
Map A of the CAR LUP titled, “Local Coastal Program General Viewshed”, indicates the subject property is outside the public viewshed. Carmel Area LUP Policy 2.2.3.6 requires that structures are subordinate to and blended into the environment and proposes colors and materials that aid reducing visual impacts. As designed and sited, the project proposed as described is consistent with the surrounding neighborhood character, as well as the Visual Resources Chapter of the Carmel Area Land Use Plan. It would have no impact on visual resources. As confirmed at a site visit, intervening vegetation and existing development prevent the development’s visibility from common public viewing areas. Accordingly, the proposed residence and accessory structures would not create any adverse visual impacts. Therefore, as proposed and conditioned, the project assures protection of the public viewshed and visual integrity.
Therefore, staff recommends the Board of Supervisors deny the appeal of Carol Bernstein, and Sebastion Miller and Sarah Miller of the August 27, 2026, Zoning Administrator’s August 27, 2026, approval of a Combined Development Permit.
CEQA:
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines sections 15301 (Existing Facilities) and 15303 (New Construction and Conversion of Small Structures(a) and (e) categorically exempt the demolition and removal of one single-family dwelling and construction of new structures and accessory structures, respectively. As proposed, the existing 646 square foot single-family dwelling will be demolished for the construction of a 2,794 square foot single-family dwelling with an attached 263 square foot garage, with associated site improvements, and an attached 800 square foot accessory dwelling unit.
There are no applicable exceptions to either Exemption under Section 15300.2. The proposed project does not create impacts to an environmental resource, any scenic highways, or historical resources; this will not create any cumulative or significant impact, and this site is not a hazardous waste site. No evidence of significant adverse environmental effects were identified during staff’s review of the development application
OTHER AGENCY INVOLVEMENT/COMMITTEE ACTIONS:
The following agencies have reviewed the project, have comments, and/or have recommended conditions:
Environmental Health Bureau
Cypress Fire Protection District
Carmel Unincorporated/Highlands Land Use Advisory Committee
Office of County Counsel
FINANCING:
The Board appeal fee is typically $3,572; however, projects in the coastal zone that are appealable to the California Coastal Commission are not charged an appeal fee. Funding for staff time associated with this project is included in the FY 26-27 Adopted Budget for HCD Community Development, Fund 1001, Appropriation HCD101, Department 310002.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS:
The project aligns with Board of Supervisors Strategic Plan Goals A: This action represents effective and timely response to our HCD customers. Processing this application in accordance with all applicable policies and regulations also keeps the County accountable to the public for proper management of public land resources.
Mark a check to the related Board of Supervisors Strategic Plan Goals:
X Well-Being and Quality of Life
____ Sustainable Infrastructure for the Present and Future
____ Safe and Resilient Communities
____ Diverse and Thriving Economy
____ Dynamic Organization and Employer of Choice
Link to the Strategic Plan:
<https://www.countyofmonterey.gov/home/showdocument?id=139569>
Prepared by: Imani Harrigan, Assistant Planner, and Jacquelyn M. Nickerson, Principal Planner
Reviewed by: Melanie Beretti, AICP, Chief of Planning
Approved by: Craig Spencer, HCD Director
The following attachments are on file with Clerk of the Board:
Attachment A - Draft Resolution including:
• Recommended Conditions of Approval
• Site Plan
Attachment B - Vicinity Map
Attachment C - Arborist Report
Attachment D - Geotechnical Report
Attachment E - Public Comment
Attachment F - Carmel Highlands LUAC Meeting Minutes
Attachment G - Zoning Administrator Resolution No. 26-082
Attachment H - Notice of Appeal by Carol Bernstein
Attachment I - Notice of Appeal by Sebastion and Sarah Miller
cc: Front Counter Copy; County of Monterey Board of Supervisors; Cypress Fire Protection District; HCD-Environmental Services; HCD - Engineering Services; Environmental Health Bureau; Imani Harrigan, Project Planner; Jacquelyn M. Nickerson, Principal Planner; Kshire Property Investments LLC, Property Owner; Carla Hashimoto, Agent; The Open Monterey Project (Molly Erickson); Laborers International Union of North America (Lozeau Drury LLP); Christina McGinnis, Keep Big Sur Wild; LandWatch; Project File PLN240362.