HomeMy WebLinkAboutCD 11-03; MUROYA SUBDIVISION; Consistency Determination (CD)CITY OF CARLSBAD APPLICATION FORM FOR CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION APPLICATION
PROJECT NAME: Muroya Subdivision
Assessor's Parcel Number(s): 215-040-03 ----------------------------Description of proposal (add attachment if necessary):
See attachment.
Would you like to orally present your proposal to your assigned staff planner/engineer? Yes No □
Please list the staff members you have previously spoken to regarding this project. If none, please so state.
Dan Halverson
OWNER NAME (Print): Akira Muroya & Toshiko Muroya
P.O. Box 131016
APPLICANT NAME (Print): Taylor Morrison of CA, LLC
MAILING ADDRESS:
CITY, STATE, ZIP: Carlsbad, CA 92013
TELEPHONE: 760-438-7691
EMAIL ADDRESS:
*Owner's signature indicates permission to conduct a preliminary
review for a development proposal.
MAILING ADDRESS: __ 1_5_C_u_s_h_i_n ___ g ______ _
CITY, STATE, ZIP: Irvine, CA 92618
TELEPHONE: 949-341-1289
EMAIL ADDRESS: a torn illo@taylormorrison.com
APPLICANTS REPRESENTATIVE (Print): Jack Henthorn and Associates --------------------------MA I LING ADDRESS: 1902 Wright Place, Suite 200
CITY, STATE, ZIP:
TELEPHONE:
EMAIL ADDRESS:
Carlsbad,Ca.92008
(760) 438 4090
henthorn@jhenthorn.com
EGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE
THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND
F NOWLEDGE.
3-11--/(
DATE
RlliClflB)
MAR 1 ~ 2011
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLANNING DEPT
ING THIS APPLICATION IT MAY BE NECESSARY FOR MEMBERS OF CITY STAFF TO INSPECT AND
IS THE SU LIGATION. I/WE CONSENT TO ENTRY FOR THIS PURPOSE.
FEE REQUIRED/DATE FEE PAID:
RECEIVED BY: -~""""-&.·~---------------------------
P-16 Page 2 of2 Revised 07/10
APPLICATION CONTENT INVENTORY
MURO YA CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION
1. Application form -executed by owner and applicant
2. Fee check -Taylor Morrison #1202 in the amount of $656.00
3. Detailed written description of the proposed revisions
4. Two (2) sets of the:
a. original approved site plan folded to 8.5 X 11
b. original approved landscape plan folded to 8.5 X 11
c. original approved architectural plans folded to 8.5 X 11
5. Two (2) sets of the:
a. revised site plan folded to 8.5 X 11
b. revised landscape plan folded to 8.5 X 11 (Jn.
c. revised approved architectural plans folded to 8.5 X 11 -Iv C6nA-fl\1'l.p;:rt 1)(:-~
6. Two (2) copies of Policy 44 Criteria Compliance Table
7. Two (2) copies of Building Elevation Design Elements matrix
8. Two (2) copies of Consistency Determination Criteria repsonse
q, TtVd:...?.)Cop1e5 tlx.t7 AIJ..c.H-1~,urv,-z... ,:'t.ff}.15
L,U rt h c...o l'\A-r t.. v _ i , \.-42._. b-e ~ .... 1 a .f-+ev----
\
Architectural
Guideline
Policy 44 Criteria Compliance Table
Muroya Property
Taylor Morrison
Standard Comments
Floor Plans and Elevations
2
3
4
Site Planning
5
All residential projects shall be required to have a minimum
number of different floor plans, different front and corresponding
matching rear elevations with different color schemes as identified
below:
•
•
•
•
2-4 dwelling units shall provide 1 floor plan and 2 different
elevations.
5-12 dwelling units shall provide 2 different floor plans and
2 different elevations.
13-20 dwelling units shall provide 2 different floor plans and
3 different elevations.
21+ dwelling units shall provide 3 different floor plans and 3
different elevations.
Every house should have a coherent architectural style. All
elevations of a house, including front, side and rear, should have
the same design integrity of forms, details and materials.
In addition to the previous requirements, design details should
reinforce and enhance the architectural form and style of every
house and differ from other elevations of the same floor plan. A
minimum of 4 complimentary design details, including but not
limited to those listed below, shall be incorporated into each of the
front, rear and street side building facades) of the house.
• • • • • • • •
• •
DESIGN DETAILS
Balconies
Decorative eaves and fascia
Exposed roof rafter tails
Arched elements
Towers
Knee braces
Downers
Columns
Exterior wood elements
Accent materials I.e.; brick, stone, shingles, wood or
siding)
Floor plans in a project shall exhibit a variety of roof ridges and
roof heights within a neighborhood.
Houses with both the same floor plan and elevation style shall not
occur on adjacent lots.
The project proposal includes 37 detached
condominium units. There are 4 floor plans proposed
with three distinct architectural styles for the elevations,
Adobe Ranch, Andalusian and Santa Barbara.
MARCH 2011 SU BM ITT AL:
The project proposal includes 37 detached
condominium units. There are 4 floor plans
proposed with three distinct architectural styles for
the elevations; "A" -Adobe Ranch, "8" -
Andalusian, and "C" -Santa Barbara.
The three architectural styles proposed for the project
include Adobe Ranch, Andalusian and Santa Barbara.
These styles incorporate the forms and detailing that
are conducive with the styles of architecture.
MARCH 2011 SUBMITTAL:
There are three distinct architectural styles for the
elevations; "A" -Adobe Ranch, "8" -Andalusian,
and "C" -Santa Barbara. These styles incorporate
the forms and detailing that are conducive with the
styles of architecture.
All elevation styles comply. Please refer to the
attached "Building Elevation Design Elements" matrix.
MARCH 2011 SUBMITTAL:
See Revised Building Elevation Design Elements
matrix. The following elements are incorporated
into the architecture:
• Balconies
• Decorative eaves and fascia
• Exposed roof rafter tails
• Arched elements
• Towers
• Columns
• Exterior wood elements
• Accent materials (i.e.; brick, stone,
shingles, wood or siding)
• Window and door lintels, and window
surround.
• Varied window shapes
All floor plans and elevation styles comply. Please
refer roof plans of the enclosed architecture plans for
details.
MARCH 2011 SUBMITTAL:
All floor plans and elevation styles comply. Refer to
roof plans of the enclosed architecture plans for
details.
As shown on the enclosed site plan, units with the
same floor plan and elevation style do not occur on
adjacent lots.
MARCH 2011 SUBMITTAL:
Units 28 and 29 were originally approved with the
same plotting occurring on adjacent lots. Due to
site constraints Units 28 and 29 are still plotted
with the same plan type on adjacent lots. However,
to differentiate the units the following has been
Page 1
Architectural
Policy 44 Criteria Compliance Table
Muroya Property
Taylor Morrison
Guideline Standard Comments
proposed: 1) Each unit is plotted with a different
elevation; 2) a porch is included on unit 29; 3) to
further differentiate the houses, unit 29 has a
greater front yard setback than unit 28; 4) unit 28 is
plotted on a unique "lot'' size and shape; and 5)
unit 28 is plotted with a 45 degree offset as
compared to unit 29, which creates a unique street
scene.
6 Reverse floor plans shall be included where possible to add variety Where possible reverse floor plans have been plotted.
to the street scene.
Single Story Requirements
7
8
A minimum of 15% of the total number of homes shall be single
story structures. Single-story is defined as a maximum plate-line of
15 feet and a maximum building height of 20 feet. Lofts are permitted
subject to CMC Section 21.04.330.
or
A minimum of 10% of the total number of homes shall be single
story structures and 15% shall be reduced second story structures.
A reduced second story structure shall comply with the following
criteria:
• A minimum of 60% of the roofline shall be single story;
• A 2-story element may be added in the central portion of
the front and rear elevation; and
• The second story element may be no greater than 25%
of the floor area of the first floor of the house (including
garage).
or
For alley-loaded product, a minimum of 20% of the homes shall be
single-story for the front 20% of the home (overall depth of house
times 20%).
A maximum of 20% of the total number of h o m e s a re exempt
from the requirement to have a single-story building edge.
MARCH 2011 SUBMITTAL:
Where possible reverse floor plans have been
plotted.
The enclosed proposal includes a total of 37 units,
which equates to a requirement of 5.55 units being
single-story or six (6) units per Note #1 of the policy.
Plan 1 of the proposal is a single-story unit and is
plotted six (6) within the development complying with
the guideline.
MARCH 2011 SUBMITTAL:
The enclosed proposal includes a total of 37 units,
which equates to a requirement of 5.55 units being
single-story or six (6) units per Note #1 of the
policy. Plan 1 of the proposal is a single-story unit
and (6) six houses are plotted within the
development complying with the guideline.
20% of the total number of proposed units is 7.4 units.
The remaining thirty -one (31) units comply with
Guideline No. 9 below. Lot 5,13,14,28, 29, and 36 are
exempt from the single-story building edge
requirement.
MARCH 2011 SUBMITTAL:
20% of the total number of proposed units is 7.4
units. The remaining thirty (30) units comply with
Guideline No. 9 below.
Page2
Policy 44 Criteria Compliance Table
Muroya Property
Architectural
Guideline
9
Taylor Morrison
Standard
The remaining total number of homes shall comply with one of the
following guidelines:
• The home shall have a single-story building edge with a
depth of not less than 8 feet and shall run the length of
the building along one side except for tower elements.
The roof covering the single-story element shall
incorporate a separate roof plane and shall be
substantially lower than the roof for the two-story
element. Porches and porte-cochere elements shall
qualify as a single-story edge. Houses with courtyards
that are a minimum of 15 feet wide located along the
side of the house and setback a minimum of 15 feet
from the property line are not required to have a single
story building edge.
•
•
The home shall have a single-story building edge with a
depth of not less than 5 feet and shall run the length
of the building along one side. The roof of the single
story element shall be substantially lower than the roof
for the two-story element of the building.
The home shall have a single-story building edge with
a depth of not less than 3 feet for 40% of the perimeter
Comments
The project complies with this guideline by providing a
single-story building edge with a minimum depth of 3
feet for more than 40% of the perimeter for Plan types
2, 3, 4 and 4X. The single story building edges are
calculated as follows:
• Plan 2 -Perimeter Length= 173'-0"
Single Story Edge = 69'-0" or 40%
• Plan 3 -Perimeter Length = 230'-0"
Single Story Edge= 104'-11" or 45.6%
• Plan 4 -Perimeter Length= 246'-0"
Single Story Edge= 128'-0" or 52.0%
• Plan 4X -Perimeter Length = 250'-0"
Single Story Edge= 129'-0" or 51.6%
MARCH 2011 SUBMITTAL:
The project complies with this guideline by
providing a single-story building edge with a
minimum depth of 3 feet for at least 40% of the
perimeter for Plan types 2, 3, 4 and 4X. The single
story building edges are calculated as follows:
of the building. Plan 1 -
Plan 2 -
Single story
Perimeter Length= 173'
Multiple Building Planes
10 For at least 66% of the homes in a project, there shall be at least
3 separate building planes on street side elevations of lots with
45 feet of street frontage or less and 4 separate building planes
on street side elevations of lots with a street frontage greater than
45 feet. Balconies and covered porches qualify as a building
plane.
The minimum offset in planes shall be 18 inches and shall include,
but not be limited to, building walls, windows, porches and roofs.
The minimum depth between the faces of the forward-most
plane and the rear plane on the front elevation shall be 1 0
feet. A plane must be a minimum of 30 sq. ft. to receive credit
under this section.
Single Story Edge = 69' or 40%
Plan 3 -Perimeter Length = 230'
Single Story Edge= 105' or 46%
Plan 4 -Perimeter Length = 246'
Single Story Edge= 128' or 52%
Plan 4X -Perimeter Length = 250'
Single Story Edge = 100' or 40%
66% of the total number of proposed units is 24.42
units or 24 units per Note #1 of the policy. Plan types 2
& 3 are plotted on a total of 24 lots within the
development and meet the minimum number of four
building planes on the street side elevation.
Plan 1 = 3 Planes
Plan 2 = 4 Planes
Plan 3 = 4 Planes
Plan 4 = 4 Planes
Plan 4X = 3 Planes
MARCH 2011 SU BM ITT AL:
Plan 1 = 57' wide
Plan 2 & 2X = 32' wide
Plan 3 & 3X = 42' wide
Plan 4 & 4X = 39' wide
66% of the total number of proposed units is 24.64
units or 25 units per Note #1 of the policy. All 37 of
the plan types meet the minimum number of
building planes on the street side elevation. The
number of planes for each plan type is below.
Plan 1 = 4 Planes
Plan 2 = 5 Planes
Plan 3 = 5 Planes
Plan 4 = 4 Planes
Plan 4X = 4 Planes
Page 3
Architectural
Guideline
11
12
Windows/Doors
13
14
Front Porches
15
Policy 44 Criteria Compliance Table
Muroya Property
Taylor Morrison
Standard Comments
Rear elevations shall adhere to the same criteria outlined in The following plan types for the development meet the
Number 10 above for front elevations except that the minimum minimum number of four building planes on the rear
depth between front and back planes on the rear elevation elevation.
shall be 4 feet. Rear balconies qualify as a building plane.
Plan 1 = 3 Planes
Plan 2 = 4 Planes
Plan 3 = 4 Planes
Plan 4 = 5 Planes
Plan 4X = 5 Planes
MARCH 2011 SUBMITTAL:
66% of the total number of proposed units is 24.64
units or 25 units per Note #1 of the policy. 31 lots
meet the minimum number of building planes for
rear elevations. The number of planes for each plan
type is below.
Plan 1 = 3 Planes
Plan 2 = 5 Planes
Plan3 = 5 Planes
Plan4 = 6 Planes
Plan 4X = 6 Planes
For at least 66% of the homes in a project, one side elevation Plan types 1, 3, 4 and 4X incorporate side yard cutouts
shall have sufficient offsets or cutouts so that the side yard and offsets that average a minimum of 8.5 feet. In
setback averages a minimum of 8.5 feet. addition there are six (6) instances where the Plan 2
has a side yard setback that averages greater than 8.5
feet, at Lot 5, 13, 14,28, 29, and 36. These plan types
are plotted on 28 lots or 75.6% of the total unit mix.
MARCH 2011 SUBMITTAL:
66% of the homes equates to 25 buildings. Plan
types 3, 3X, 4 & 4X, for a total of 15 buildings,
incorporate side yard cutouts and offsets that
average a minimum of 8.5 feet. In addition there are
3 instances where the Plan 1, buildings 18, 34, and
35, has a side yard setback that averages greater
than 8.5 feet, and there are 7 instances where the
Plan 2, on buildings 12, 13, 17, 19, 28, 29, and 36,
has a side yard setback that averages greater than
8.5 feet. These plan types are plotted on 25 lots or
68% of the total unit mix.
At least 66% of exterior openings (door/windows) on every All of the exterior openings are either recessed or inset
home in the project shall be recessed or projected a minimum of a minimum of 2" or trimmed with a minimum 2" thick
2 inches and shall be constructed with wood, vinyl or colored foam trim.
aluminum window frames (no mill finishes).
MARCH 2011 SUBMITTAL:
All of the exterior openings are either recessed or
inset a minimum of 2" or trimmed with a minimum
2" thick foam trim.
Windows shall reinforce and enhance the architectural form Varied window shapes and sizes have been used
and style of the house through, the use of signature windows throughout the proposed elevations. Please refer to
and varied window shapes and sizes. the enclosed architecture plans for details.
MARCH 2011 SU BM ITT AL:
Varied window shapes and sizes have been used
throughout the proposed elevations. Please refer
to the enclosed architecture plans for details.
Fifty percent (50%) of the homes shall be designed with a covered 67.6% of the proposed units incorporate either a porch
front porch, open courtyard, or balcony (each with a minimum depth or balcony with a minimum area of 60 square feet. The
of 6 feet and a minimum area of 60 square feet) located at the front 67 .6% or 25 units is made up of the following:
of the dwelling. The minimum depth for a covered front porch shall
be measured from the front facade of the home to the inside of any -24.3%, or 9 units, of the Plan 2 include a front porch
supporting porch posts. The front and sides of porches shall be (Plan 2 A, 8, C.-63 SF)
open except for required and/or ornamental guardrails. A varietv -24.3%, or 9 units, of the Plan 3 include a front porch
Page 4
Architectural
Guideline
Front Entries
16
Chimneys
17
Garage Doors
18
Policy 44 Criteria Compliance Table
Muroya Property
Taylor Morrison
Standard Comments
of roof elements shall be provided over porches. Porches may not (Plan 3 A, B, C-123 SF)
be converted to living space. -18.9%, or 7 units, of the Plan 4 include a front porch
(Plan 4 & 4X B, C.-100.5 SF)
MARCH 2011 SUBMITTAL:
Plan 1 has an open courtyard
Plan 2 has a porch
Plan 3 has a porch
Plan 4 has a porch
83.8%, or 31, of the proposed units incorporate
either a porch or courtyard with a minimum area of
60 square feet. The 83.8% or 31 of the units is made
up of the following:
-All 6 units of the Plan 1 include an open courtyard
-10 units of the Plan 2 include a porch
-All 9 units of the Plan 3 include a porch
-All 6 units of the Plan 4 include a porch
Seventy-five percent (75%) of the homes must have a front entry 78.3%, or 29, of the units have a front entry that is
to the home that is clearly visible from the street. Walkways from visible from the street. Lots that meet this requirement
the front door to the street are encouraged. include Lot 1,2,3,4, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16.17 .18,20,through
37.
MARCH 2011 SUBMITTAL:
36 of the 37 units have a front entry that is visible
from the street. Lot 37 is the only unit that does not
have a visible front entry from the street.
Chimneys and chimney caps shall be in scale with the size of the Proposed chimneys and chimney caps are in scale
home. No more than 2 chimneys shall be allowed for homes on with the size of the home. Please refer to the enclosed
lots in planned developments having an area less than 7,500 architecture plans.
square feet.
MARCH 2011 SUBMITTAL:
Proposed chimneys and chimney caps are in scale
with the size of the home. Please refer to the
enclosed architecture plans.
Garage doors for 3 or 4 cars in a row that directly face the street The proposed project does not include any garage
must have a minimum of an 18" plane change between the garage doors for 3 or 4 cars in a row.
doors after the 2 car garage door.
MARCH 2011 SUBMITTAL:
The proposed project does not include any garage
doors for 3 or 4 cars in a row.
Note #1: Fractional units of .5 or greater shall be rounded up to the next whole number and located in a manner to achieve the
best project design as determined by the project planner, When a percentage of units are described in the guidelines, the intent
is to have that percentage spread throughout the entire project.
Page 5
PLAN ONE
DESIGN ELEMENTS Adobe Ranch Andalusian
l'rot\t S\de Rur l'r«>t Side R""1
a. Knee Braces
b. Exposed Roof Beams or Rafter Tails ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
c. Arched Elements ✓
d. Window and Door Lintels, and
bottom surround ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
e. Towers ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
f. Varied Window Shapes ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
g, Dormers
h. Columns
i. Exterior Wood Elements ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
j. Accent Materials such as brick, stone,
shingles, wood or siding ✓
k. Balcony or Juliet Balcony
Taylor Morrison Homes, Inc
Muroya Property
BUILDING ELEVATION DESIGN ELEMENTS
PLAN1WO
Adobe Ranch I Andalusian -Adobe Ranch
Fron\ Sin,, R,m Ftom Side R.., Front Side\ Rear Front Side Rear
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Muroya • Building Elevation Design Elements 2011 03 04.xls
PLAN THREE PLAN FOUR
Andalusian Santa Barbara Andalusian Santa Barbara
Front Side Rear Front Side Rear Front Side Rear Front 'SinA 'l H,.,lllf'
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
CD
Consistency Determination Criteria
MUROYA PROPERTY
GPA 06-09/ZC 06-08/CT O6-27/HDP 06-10/CDP 06-32/HMPP 07-02
1) No project condition, feature, facility, or amenity is changed or deleted that had
been considered essential to the project's design, quality, safety, or function;
• All essential conditions, features, facilities and amenities have been
retained to insure the project's approved design, quality, safety or function
in that the site has simply been rearranged slightly to comply with recently
enacted storm water criteria. Architectural enhancement modifications are
proposed within the limits of policy 35.
2) The request represents an upgrade in overall design features and or materials and
improves upon the project's compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood;
• The request includes modifications to the architectural plans that upgrade
the interior floor plans and enhance the exterior elevations. These items
are specifically identified in the accompanying detailed written request
and architectural tables. Additionally, the reconfiguration of the northern
portion of the site has opened view opportunities to adjacent residents that
were not available with the originally approved plotting.
3) The proposed revision does not change the density (i.e. the addition of units) or
boundary of the subject property;
• The request does not modify the density of the approval since it simply
entails the rearrangement of the previously approved units. The boundary
of the subject project and the approved lots have not changed.
4) The proposed revision does not involve the addition of a new land use not shown
on the original permit ( e.g. adding a commercial use to a residential project,
replacing single family units with attached residential units, vice versa for each
example, etc.);
• There are no additions of new land uses. All land uses as shown on the
original permit remain unchanged.
RECEIVED
MAR 1 4 2011
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLANNING DEPT
5) The proposed revision does not rearrange the major land uses within the
development (e.g. it does not exchange the locations of the single family units
with attached units);
• The approved project included one single s~le family unit on an
independent lot and 3 7 detached condominium units. The single family
unit remains in the originally approved location.
6) The proposed revision does not create changes of greater than ten percent ( 10% ),
provided that compliance will be maintained with the applicable development
standards of the Carlsbad Municipal Code as follows:
Per individual lot or structure -yards, setbacks, coverage or height (height
reductions of > 10% are permitted);
On an aggregate project basis -parking, open space common area or
landscaping:
• All proposed revisions are within the 10% limits and comply with
applicable development standards of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
Supporting detail is provided in the accompaning revised documents and
tables.
7) The proposed change will not result in any significant environmental impact,
and/or require additional mitigation;
• All changes are proposed within the originally approved grading envelop
with the exception of a small area (1800 square feet) in a public easement
in the extreme northwest portion of the site. This area is adjacent to the
SDG&E easement and does not create any environmental impact or
require additional mitigation. The purpose of the grading is to provide
better access to public utilities located within the easement.
8) The proposed change will not result in any health, safety, or welfare impacts;
• The modifications proposed will improve treatment of storm water runoff
thereby improving the quality of health, safety and welfare and will also
bring the circulation system into compliance with Carlsbad street design
criteria.
9) There were not any major issues or controversies associated with the original
project which would be exacerbated with the proposed change; and
• Public testimony was provided by adjacent residents regarding concerns
with unit placement along the common property line. The proposed
revisions reduce viewshed impacts and improve architectural appearance
beyond the original approval.
10) The proposed change would not be readily discernible to the decision makers as
being substantially different from the project as originally approved.
• The proposed changes to the plotting would not be discernible to decision
makers as being substantially different since the basin location was
originally approved in the northwestern portion of the site. The basin has
simply been moved away from Nightshade creating more landscaped area.
The basin remains at the extreme end of the project. The original
architectural styles, materials and colors have been maintained. The
changes have improved street exposure and enhanced the exterior
appearance of the units.
The proposed revision does comply with all of the above listed Consistency
Determination findings, and a determination of consistency £!!! be made.