Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-06-03; Planning Commission; ; PUD 2018-0008/SDP 2018-0016/CDP 2018-0041/MS 2018-0012 (DEV2018-0022) - THREE ON CHERRY Item No. Application complete date: March 30, 2020 P.C. AGENDA OF: June 3, 2020 Project Planner: Esteban Danna Project Engineer: Jennifer Horodyski SUBJECT: PUD 2018-0008/SDP 2018-0016/CDP 2018-0041/MS 2018-0012 (DEV2018-0022) – THREE ON CHERRY – Request for approval of a Planned Development Permit, Site Development Plan, Coastal Development Permit, and Tentative Parcel Map to demolish an existing single-family residence and construct a three-unit, residential air-space condominium project on a 0.16-acre site located at 160 Cherry Avenue, within the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program and Local Facilities Management Zone 1. The project site is located outside the appealable area of the California Coastal Commission. The City Planner has determined that this project belongs to a class of projects that the State Secretary for Resources has found do not have a significant impact on the environment and is therefore categorically exempt from the requirement for the preparation of environmental documents pursuant to section 15303 (b) (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the State CEQA guidelines. I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 7369 APPROVING Planned Development Permit PUD 2018-0008, Site Development Plan SDP 2018-0016, Coastal Development Permit CDP 2018-0041, and Tentative Parcel Map MS 2018-0012 based upon the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND The subject 0.16-acre infill site is located at 160 Cherry Avenue within the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program and Beach Area Overlay Zone (BAOZ). The property is generally flat and is currently developed with a single-family residence. The development of the proposed condominiums requires the processing and approval of a Planned Development Permit, Site Development Plan, Coastal Development Permit and Tentative Parcel Map. The subdivision is considered minor and requires a parcel map (MS – minor subdivision) because it involves the division of land into four or fewer condominiums. Table “A” below includes the General Plan designations, zoning, and current land uses of the project site and surrounding properties. 1 PUD 2018-0008/SDP 2018-0016/CDP 2018-0041/MS 2018-0012 (DEV2018-0022) – THREE ON CHERRY June 3, 2020 Page 2 TABLE A – SITE AND SURROUNDING LAND USE Location General Plan Designation Zoning Current Land Use Site R-23 Residential (15-23 du/ac) Multiple-Family Residential (R-3) within Beach Area Overlay Zone (BAOZ) Single-family residence North R-23 Multiple-Family Residential (R-3) within BAOZ Multiple-family Residential South R-23 R-3 within BAOZ Multiple-family Residential East R-23 R-3 within BAOZ Multiple-family Residential West R-23 R-3 within BAOZ Multiple-family Residential The project proposes the construction of three attached, three-story residential air-space condominiums. Vehicular access is proposed to be provided via Cherry Avenue. Each home includes an attached two-car garage with direct entrance into the unit. The units contain three bedrooms each and range in size from 2,105 square feet to 2,290 square feet. All units include private balconies on the second floor and two units include private balconies on the third floor. The entrance to the front unit faces Cherry Avenue while the entrances to the middle and rear units are located along the east-side yard. The project proposes a modern architectural style that is commonly seen in southern California coastal communities. The building is finished with several complementary materials, including white stucco, grey siding, and grey ledgestone veneer. Other finishes include glass balcony railings, black vinyl recessed windows, and a 3:12 pitch slate-grey standing-seam metal roof. The underlying lot will be held in common interest divided between the three air-space condominiums. The common area includes, but is not limited to, the private drive aisle and landscaped areas. Topographically, the site is generally flat with an elevation approximately 56 feet above mean sea level (MSL). The site is currently developed with one single-family home and does not contain any sensitive vegetation. Grading for the proposed project requires a grading permit and includes 230 cubic yards of cut, 55 cubic yards of fill, 175 cubic yards of export, and 393 cubic yards of remedial grading. Table “B” below includes the project site’s gross and net acreage, the number of dwelling units allowed by the General Plan’s Growth Management Control Point (GMCP) density and the proposed project’s number of dwelling units and density. TABLE B Gross Acres Net Acres DUs Allowed at GMCP Density (19 du/ac) DUs Proposed and Project Density 0.16 acres 0.16 acres 3 units 3 units at 18.75 du/ac In order to meet the City’s Inclusionary Housing requirements, the project is conditioned to pay an affordable housing in-lieu fee for two units if building permits are applied for within two years of demolishing the existing single-family home. Otherwise, the project shall be required to pay housing in- lieu fees for three units. The in-lieu housing fees are conditioned to be paid prior to final map. The project meets the City’s standards for planned developments and subdivisions and is in compliance with the General Plan, Subdivision Ordinance, and relevant zoning regulations of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC). PUD 2018-0008/SDP 2018-0016/CDP 2018-0041/MS 2018-0012 (DEV2018-0022) – THREE ON CHERRY June 3, 2020 Page 3 III. ANALYSIS The project is subject to the following regulations and requirements: A. R-23 Residential General Plan Land Use designation; B. Multiple-Family Residential (R-3) Zone, Planned Development Regulations and Beach Area Overlay Zone (BAOZ) (CMC Chapters 21.16, 21.45 and 21.82); C. Coastal Development Regulations for the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program (CMC Chapter 21.201) and the Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone (CMC Chapter 21.203); D. Subdivision Ordinance (CMC Title 20); E. Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (CMC Chapter 21.85); and F. Growth Management Ordinance (CMC Chapter 21.90) Local Facilities Management Plan Zone A. R-23 Residential General Plan Land Use Designation The General Plan Land Use designation for the property is R-23 Residential which allows residential development at a density range of 15-23 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) with a Growth Management Control Point (GMCP) of 19 du/ac. The project site has a net developable acreage of 0.16 acres. The project’s proposed density of 18.75 du/ac is within the R-23 density range of 15-23 du/ac and at the 19 du/ac GMCP. At the GMCP, 3.04 dwelling units, or 3 when rounded down per CMC Section 21.53.230(e), would be permitted on this 0.16 net-developable-acre property. Since the project proposes three units and does not exceed the GMCP, no allocation of “excess” dwelling units is necessary. Lastly, the project complies with the Elements of the General Plan as outlined in Table “C” below: TABLE C – GENERAL PLAN COMPLIANCE Element Use, Classification, Goal, Objective or Program Proposed Uses & Improvements Comply? Land Use Goal 2-G.3 Promote infill development that makes efficient use of limited land supply, while ensuring compatibility and integration with existing uses. Ensure that infill properties develop with uses and development intensities supporting a cohesive development pattern. Policy 2-P.7 Do not permit residential development below the minimum of the density range except in certain circumstances. The proposed three-unit residential infill development makes efficient use of the existing lot in that it increases the number of units from one to three. A three-unit development is compatible with the surrounding development. The three-unit residential project has a density of 18.75 (rounded up to 19) dwelling units per acre which is within the R-23 Residential density range of 15-23 du/ac and does not exceed nor is below the density range required for this land use designation. The project also satisfies the minimum dwelling units used for the purpose of calculating the City’s compliance with Government Code Section 65863. Yes PUD 2018-0008/SDP 2018-0016/CDP 2018-0041/MS 2018-0012 (DEV2018-0022) – THREE ON CHERRY June 3, 2020 Page 4 Element Use, Classification, Goal, Objective or Program Proposed Uses & Improvements Comply? Policy 2-P.8 Do not permit residential development to exceed the applicable Growth Management Control Point (GMCP) density unless certain findings are made. Housing Program 3.1 For all ownership and qualifying rental projects of fewer than seven units, payment of a fee in lieu of inclusionary units is permitted. The project is conditioned to pay an in-lieu fee on a per unit basis for two units if building permits for the three-unit project are applied for within two years of demolishing the existing single-family residence. Yes Mobility Policy 3-P.5 Require developers to construct or pay their fair share toward improvements for all travel modes consistent with the Mobility Element, the Growth Management Plan, and specific impacts associated with their development. The proposed project has been designed to meet all of the circulation requirements, including a single driveway access point off Cherry Avenue. In addition, the applicant will be required to pay traffic impact fees prior to issuance of building permit that will go toward future road improvements. Yes Noise Goal 5-G.2 Ensure that new development is compatible with the noise environment, by continuing to use potential noise exposure as a criterion in land use planning. The proposed project is consistent with the Noise Element of the General Plan in that the project’s building design, with the windows open or with mechanical ventilation as noted on the plans, adequately attenuates the noise levels for the new condominiums as described in the noise analysis report (ABC Acoustics, Inc., dated August 27, 2018). Yes Public Safety Goal 6-G.1 Minimize injury, loss of life, and damage to property resulting from fire, flood, hazardous material release, or seismic disasters. Policy 6-P.6 Enforce the requirements The proposed structural improvements will be required to be designed in conformance with all seismic design standards. In addition, the project is consistent with all of the applicable fire safety requirements. Additionally, the proposed project is not located in an area of known geologic instability or flood hazard and the site is not located in an area prone to landslides, Yes PUD 2018-0008/SDP 2018-0016/CDP 2018-0041/MS 2018-0012 (DEV2018-0022) – THREE ON CHERRY June 3, 2020 Page 5 Element Use, Classification, Goal, Objective or Program Proposed Uses & Improvements Comply? of Titles 18, 20, and 21 pertaining to drainage and flood control when reviewing applications for building permits and subdivisions. Policy 6-P.34 Enforce the Uniform Building and Fire codes, adopted by the city, to provide fire protection standards for all existing and proposed structures. Policy 6-P.39 Ensure all new development complies with all applicable regulations regarding the provision of public utilities and facilities. or susceptible to accelerated erosion, floods or liquefaction B. Multiple-Family Residential (R-3) Zone, Planned Development Regulations, and Beach Area Overlay Zone (BAOZ) The proposed project is required to comply with all applicable land use and development standards of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC) including the Multiple-Family Residential (R-3) Zone (CMC Chapter 21.16), Planned Developments (CMC Chapter 21.45), and the Beach Area Overlay Zone (BAOZ) (CMC Chapter 21.82). The three-unit, residential air-space condominium project meets or exceeds the requirements of the R-3 Zone and the BAOZ as outlined in Table D below. The Planned Development regulations provide most of the development standards with the exception of those listed in the table below. The project complies with all applicable development standards for Planned Developments (CMC Chapter 21.45). Please refer to Attachment No. 4 for an analysis of project compliance with Tables C & E of the Planned Development regulations. The project is also subject to City Council Policy No. 66 – Livable Neighborhoods. Please refer to Attachment No. 5 for a detailed analysis of project compliance with City Council Policy No. 66. PUD 2018-0008/SDP 2018-0016/CDP 2018-0041/MS 2018-0012 (DEV2018-0022) – THREE ON CHERRY June 3, 2020 Page 6 TABLE D – BAOZ AND R-3 COMPLIANCE BAOZ Standards Required Proposed Comply? Building Height 30 feet with a minimum 3:12 roof pitch provided or 24 feet if less than a 3:12 roof pitch is provided 30 feet with 3:12 roof pitch Yes R-3 Standards Required Proposed Comply? Setbacks Front: 15’ (for key lots) Interior Side: 10% Lot Width – 5’ Rear: 20% Lot Width – 10’ Front: 15’ Sides: 5’ Rear: 10’ Yes Lot Coverage 60% 52% Yes C. Coastal Development Regulations for the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program (CMC Chapter 21.201) and the Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone (CMC Chapter 21.203) 1. Mello II Segment of the Certified Local Coastal Program and all applicable policies The proposed site is located in the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program (LCP) and is not within the appealable area of the California Coastal Commission. The project site has an LCP Land Use designation of R-23 Residential and Zoning of R-3, which are consistent with the City’s General Plan and Zoning. The project’s consistency with the R-23 General Plan Land Use designation is analyzed in Section A, Table “C” above. The project consists of a three-unit, three-story air-space condominium project. The proposed project is compatible with the surrounding development of single-, two- and multi-family residential structures. The three-story structure will not obstruct views of the coastline as seen from public lands or the public right-of-way, nor otherwise damage the visual beauty of the coastal zone. No agricultural uses currently exist on the previously graded site, nor are there any sensitive resources located on the developable portion of the site. The proposed project is not located in an area of known geologic instability or flood hazard. Since the site does not have frontage along the coastline, no public opportunities for coastal shoreline access are available from the subject site. Furthermore, the residentially designated site is not suited for water- oriented recreation activities. 2. Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone The project is consistent with the provisions of the Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone (CMC Chapter 21.203 of the Zoning Ordinance) in that the project will adhere to the City’s Master Drainage Plan, Grading Ordinance, Storm Water Ordinance, BMP Design Manual and Jurisdictional Runoff Management Program (JRMP) to avoid increased urban run-off, pollutants and soil erosion. The subject property does not include steep slopes (equal to or greater than 25 percent gradient) nor native vegetation. In addition, the site is not located in an area prone to landslides, or susceptible to accelerated erosion, floods or liquefaction. D. Subdivision Ordinance (CMC Title 20) The Land Development Engineering Division has reviewed the proposed Tentative Parcel Map and has found that the subdivision complies with all applicable requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and the City’s Subdivision Ordinance (Title 20) for Minor Subdivisions. The subdivision is considered minor because it involves the division of land into four or fewer condominiums (three condominiums PUD 2018-0008/SDP 2018-0016/CDP 2018-0041/MS 2018-0012 (DEV2018-0022) – THREE ON CHERRY June 3, 2020 Page 7 proposed). The project has been conditioned to install all infrastructure-related improvements and the necessary easements for these improvements concurrent with the development. E. Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (CMC Chapter 21.85) For all residential development less than seven units, the inclusionary housing requirement may be satisfied through the payment of an inclusionary housing in-lieu fee. However, pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 21.85.030(D)(3), the construction of a new residential structure which replaces a residential structure that was destroyed or demolished within two years prior to the application for a building permit for the new residential structure is exempt from affordable housing requirements. The proposal to demolish the existing single-family residence and construct a three-unit residential condominium project has been conditioned to pay the applicable housing in-lieu fee for the two additional units, or three units if building permits for the three-unit project has not been applied for within two years of demolishing the existing home. F. Growth Management Ordinance (CMC Chapter 21.90) Local Facilities Management Plan Zone The proposed project is located within Local Facilities Management Zone 1 in the Northwest Quadrant of the City. The impacts on public facilities created by the project, and its compliance with the adopted performance standards, are summarized in Table F below. TABLE F – GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMPLIANCE Standard Impacts Comply City Administration 10.61 sq. ft. Yes Library 5.66 sq. ft. Yes Wastewater Treatment 3 EDU Yes Parks 0.02 acre Yes Drainage 0.44 CFS Yes Circulation 24 ADT Yes Fire Station No. 1 Yes Open Space 0 acres N/A Schools Carlsbad (E=0.351/M=0.1854/HS = 0.2367) Yes Sewer Collection System 3 EDU Yes Water 750 GPD Yes IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The City Planner has determined that the project belongs to a class of projects that the State Secretary for Resources has found do not have a significant impact on the environment and is therefore categorically exempt from the requirement for the preparation of environmental documents pursuant to Section 15303 (b) – New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures of the State CEQA Guidelines. In making this determination, the City Planner has found that the exceptions listed in Section 15300.2 of the state CEQA Guidelines do not apply to this project, including “historical resources.” Specifically, the existing structure, which is estimated to be 63 years old and is proposed to be demolished, is not included in a local register of historical resources, and a qualified professional has determined that it does not meet the criteria for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources. A Notice of Exemption will be filed by the City Planner upon final project approval. PUD 2018-0008/SDP 2018-0016/CDP 2018-0041/MS 2018-0012 (DEV2018-0022) – THREE ON CHERRY June 3, 2020 Page 8 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 7369 2. Location Map 3. Disclosure Statement 4. Planned Development Tables C & E 5. City Council Policy No. 66 Compliance Table 6. Reduced Exhibits 7. Full Size Exhibits “A” – “M” dated June 3, 2020 G A R F I E L D S T CHER RY A V ACACI A AV CAR L SBAD B L PUD 2018-0008/SDP 2018-0016/CDP 2018-0041/MS 2018-0012 THREE ON CHERRY SITE MAP J SITE E L C AMINO R E ALLA COSTA AVCARLSBAD B L MELROSE DR POINSETT I A L N ATTACHMENT 2 ATTACHMENT 3 PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS (CMC SECTION 21.45.060) TABLE C: GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO ALL PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS REF. NO. SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT STANDARD COMPLIANCE COMMENT C.1 Density Per the underlying General Plan designation. When two or more general plan land use designations exist within a planned development, the density may be transferred from one general plan designation to another with a general plan amendment. N/A C.2 Arterial Setbacks All dwelling units adjacent to any arterial road shown on the Circulation Element of the General Plan shall maintain the following minimum setbacks from the right-of-way: Prime Arterial 50 Feet Major Arterial 40 Feet Secondary Arterial 30 Feet Carlsbad Boulevard 20 Feet N/A Half (50%) of the required arterial setback area located closest to the arterial shall be fully landscaped to enhance the street scene and buffer homes from traffic on adjacent arterials, and: •Shall contain a minimum of one 24” box tree for every 30 lineal feet of street frontage; and •Shall be commonly owned and maintained N/A Project perimeter walls greater than 42 inches in height shall not be located in the required landscaped portion of the arterial setback, except noise attenuation walls that: •Are required by a noise study, and •Due to topography, are necessary to be placed within the required landscaped portion of the arterial setback. N/A C.3 Permitted Intrusions into Setbacks/ Building Separation Permitted intrusions into required building setbacks shall be the same as specified in Section 21.46.120 of this code. The same intrusions specified in Section 21.46.120 shall be permitted into required building separation. CMC Section 21.46.120 permits a 2’ roof eave intrusion into required yards. Proposed roof eaves intrude 1’ – 6” into the required yards. C.4 Streets Private Minimum right-of-way width 56 feet N/A Minimum curb-to-curb width 34 feet Minimum parkway width (curb adjacent) 5.5 feet, including curb Minimum sidewalk width 5 feet (setback 6 inches from property line) Public Minimum right-of-way width 60 feet N/A Minimum curb-to-curb width 34 feet Minimum parkway width (curb adjacent) 7.5 feet, including curb Minimum sidewalk width 5 feet (setback 6 inches from property line) Street Trees within parkways One-family dwellings and twin homes on small-lots A minimum of one street tree (24-inch box) per lot is required to be planted in the parkway along all streets. N/A ATTACHMENT 4 Condominium projects Street trees shall be spaced no further apart than 30 feet on center within the parkway. A conceptual landscape plan has been reviewed and deemed complete by the city. The project is conditioned to require final landscape plan approval. Tree species should be selected to create a unified image for the street, provide an effective canopy, avoid sidewalk damage and minimize water consumption. A conceptual landscape plan has been reviewed and deemed complete by the city. The project is conditioned to require final landscape plan approval. C.5 Drive-aisles 3 or fewer dwelling units Minimum 12 feet wide when the drive-aisle is not required for emergency vehicle access, as determined by the Fire Chief. The project drive-aisle is 12 feet wide since emergency vehicle access is not required. Project complies. If the drive-aisle is required for emergency vehicle access, it shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide. 4 or more dwelling units Minimum 20 feet wide. N/A All projects No parking shall be permitted within the minimum required width of a drive-aisle. Project does not propose any parking within the drive-aisle. Project complies. A minimum 24-foot vehicle back-up/maneuvering area shall be provided in front of garages, carports or uncovered parking spaces (this may include driveway area, drive-aisles, and streets). Each parking space, including visitor parking space includes a minimum 24 ft. vehicle back- up/maneuvering area behind each space. Project complies. Additional width may be required for vehicle/emergency vehicle maneuvering area. N/A Parkways and/or sidewalks may be required. Project is conditioned to construct infrastructure improvements where necessary. No more than 24 dwelling units shall be located along a single- entry drive-aisle. N/A All drive-aisles shall be enhanced with decorative pavement. Project proposes to provide decorative pavement on the drive- aisle. C.6 Number of Visitor Parking Spaces Required (1) Projects with 10 units or fewer A .30 space per each unit. Project proposes three units. At 0.30 spaces per units, the project requires 0.9 spaces or 1 space on rounding up to the nearest whole number. Project provides one visitor parking space. Project complies. Projects 11 units or more A .25 space per each unit. When calculating the required number of visitor parking spaces, if the calculation results in a fractional parking space, the required number of visitor parking spaces shall always be rounded up to the nearest whole number. C.7 Location of Visitor Parking On Private/ Public Streets On-street visitor parking is permitted on private/public streets, subject to the following: • The private/public street is a minimum 34-feet wide (curb- to-curb) • There are no restrictions that would prohibit on-street parking where the visitor parking is proposed • The visitor parking spaces may be located: o Along one or both sides of any private/public street(s) located within the project boundary, and o Along the abutting side and portion of any existing public/private street(s) that is contiguous to the project boundary N/A In parking bays along public/private streets within the project boundary, provided the parking bays are outside the minimum required street right-of-way width. N/A When visitor parking is provided as on-street parallel parking, not less than 24 lineal feet per space, exclusive of driveway/drive-aisle entrances and aprons, shall be provided for each parking space, except where parallel parking spaces are located immediately adjacent to driveway/drive-aisle aprons, then 20 lineal feet may be provided. N/A Within the Beach Area Overlay Zone, on-street parking shall not count toward meeting the visitor parking requirement. Project is located within the BAOZ. All required visitor parking is being provided onsite. Project complies. On Drive- aisles Visitor parking must be provided in parking bays that are located outside the required minimum drive-aisle width. Project proposes one visitor parking space on-site located outside of the required minimum driveway width. Project complies. On a Driveway Outside the Beach Area Overlay Zone One required visitor parking space may be credited for each driveway in a project that has a depth of 40 feet or more. N/A For projects with 10 or fewer units, all required visitor parking may be located within driveways (located in front of a unit’s garage), provided that all dwelling units in the project have driveways with a depth of 20 feet or more. N/A Within the Beach Area Overlay Zone One required visitor parking space may be credited for each driveway in a project that has a depth of 40 feet or more. N/A If the streets within and/or adjacent to the project allow for on-street parking on both sides of the street, then visitor parking may be located in a driveway, subject to the following: • All required visitor parking may be located within driveways (located in front of a unit’s garage), provided that all dwelling units in the project have driveways with a depth of 20 feet or more. • If less than 100% of the driveways in a project have a depth of 20 feet or more, then a .25 visitor parking space will be credited for each driveway in a project that has a depth of 20 feet or more (calculations resulting in a fractional parking space credit shall always be rounded down to the nearest whole number). N/A All projects The minimum driveway depth required for visitor parking (20 feet or 40 feet) applies to driveways for front or side-loaded garages, and is measured from the property line, back of sidewalk, or from the edge of the drive-aisle, whichever is closest to the structure. N/A Compact Parking For projects of more than 25 units, up to 25% of visitor parking may be provided as compact spaces (8 feet by 15 feet). No overhang is permitted into any required setback area or over sidewalks less than 6 feet wide. N/A For all projects within the Beach Area Overlay Zone, up to 55% of the visitor parking may be provided as compact spaces (8 feet by 15 feet). N/A Distance from unit Visitor parking spaces must be located no more than 300 feet as measured in a logical walking path from the entrance of the unit it could be considered to serve. Distance from visitor parking spaces to furthest unit is less than 300 ft. Project complies. C.8 Screening of Parking Areas Open parking areas should be screened from adjacent residences and public rights-of-way by either a view-obscuring wall, landscaped berm, or landscaping, except parking located within a driveway. The visitor parking spaces will be screened from adjacent residences and public right-of-way by landscaping, and walls. Project complies. C.9 Community Recreational Space (1) Community recreational space shall be provided for all projects of 11 or more dwelling units, as follows: N/A Minimum community recreational space required Project is NOT within R-23 general plan designation 200 square feet per unit Project IS within R-23 general plan designation 150 square feet per unit Projects with 11 to 25 dwelling units Community recreational space shall be provided as either (or both) passive or active recreation facilities. N/A Projects with 26 or more dwelling units Community recreational space shall be provided as both passive and active recreational facilities with a minimum of 75% of the area allocated for active facilities. N/A Projects with 50 or more dwelling units Community recreational space shall be provided as both passive and active recreational facilities for a variety of age groups (a minimum of 75% of the area allocated for active facilities). N/A For projects consisting of one-family dwellings or twin homes on small-lots, at least 25% of the community recreation space must be provided as pocket parks. • Pocket park lots must have a minimum width of 50 feet and be located at strategic locations such as street intersections (especially “T- intersections”) and where open space vistas may be achieved. N/A All projects (with 11 or more dwelling units) Community recreational space shall be located and designed so as to be functional, usable, and easily accessible from the units it is intended to serve. N/A Credit for indoor recreation facilities shall not exceed 25% of the required community recreation area. N/A Required community recreation areas shall not be located in any required front yard and may not include any streets, drive-aisles, driveways, parking areas, storage areas, slopes of 5% or greater, or walkways (except those walkways that are clearly integral to the design of the recreation area). N/A Recreation Area Parking In addition to required resident and visitor parking, recreation area parking shall be provided, as follows: 1 space for each 15 residential units, or fraction thereof, for units located more than 1,000 feet from a community recreation area. N/A The location of recreation area parking shall be subject to the same location requirements as for visitor parking, except that required recreation area parking shall not be located within a driveway(s). N/A Examples of recreation facilities include, but are not limited to, the following: Active Swimming pool area Children’s playground equipment Spa Courts (tennis, racquetball, volleyball, basketball) Recreation rooms or buildings Horseshoe pits Pitch and putt Grassy play areas with a slope of less than 5% (minimum area of 5,000 square feet and a minimum dimension of 50 feet) Any other facility deemed by the City Planner to satisfy the intent of providing active recreational facilities Passive Benches Barbecues Community gardens Grassy play areas with a slope of less than 5% C.10 Lighting Lighting adequate for pedestrian and vehicular safety shall be provided. The project is conditioned to complete a final lighting plan. Appropriate lighting for the three- unit project will be evaluated with the final lighting plan. Project complies. C.11 Reserved C.12 Recreational Vehicle (RV) Storage (1) Required for projects with 100 or more units, or a master or specific plan with 100 or more planned development units. Exception: RV storage is not required for projects located within the R-15 or R-23 land use designations. N/A 20 square feet per unit, not to include area required for driveways and approaches. Developments located within master plans or residential specific plans may have this requirement met by the common RV storage area provided by the master plan or residential specific plan. RV storage areas shall be designed to accommodate recreational vehicles of various sizes (i.e. motorhomes, campers, boats, personal watercraft, etc.). N/A The storage of recreational vehicles shall be prohibited in the front yard setback and on any public or private streets or any other area visible to the public. A provision containing this restriction shall be included in the covenants, conditions and restrictions for the project. All RV storage areas shall be screened from adjacent residences and public rights-of-way by a view-obscuring wall and landscaping. N/A C.13 Storage Space 480 cubic feet of separate storage space per unit. N/A If all storage for each unit is located in one area, the space may be reduced to 392 cubic feet. Required storage space shall be separately enclosed for each unit and be conveniently accessible to the outdoors. N/A Required storage space may be designed as an enlargement of a covered parking structure provided it does not extend into the area of the required parking stall and does not impede the ability to utilize the parking stall (for vehicle parking). N/A A garage (12’x20’ one-car, 20’x20’ two-car, or larger) satisfies the required storage space per unit. Each unit proposes a 20’x20’ two- car garage. Project complies. This requirement is in addition to closets and other indoor storage areas. N/A (1) This standard does not apply to housing for senior citizens (see Chapter 21.84 of this code). PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS (CMC SECTION 21.45.080) TABLE E: CONDOMINIUM PROJECTS REF. NO. SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT STANDARD COMPLIANCE COMMENT E.1 Livable Neighborhood Policy Must comply with City Council Policy 66, Principles for the Development of Livable Neighborhoods. SEE SEPARATE COMPLIANCE CHART E.2 Architectural Requirements One-family and two-family dwellings Must comply with City Council Policy 44, Neighborhood Architectural Design Guidelines N/A Multiple-family dwellings There shall be at least three separate building planes on all building elevations. The minimum offset in planes shall be 18 inches and shall include, but not be limited to, building walls, windows, and roofs. The building contains at least three separate building planes on all building elevations that are at a minimum of 18”. Project complies. All building elevations shall incorporate a minimum of four complimentary design elements, including but not limited to: • A variety of roof planes; • Windows and doors recessed a minimum of 2 inches; • Decorative window or door frames; • Exposed roof rafter tails; • Dormers; • Columns; • Arched elements; • Varied window shapes; • Exterior wood elements; • Accent materials such as brick, stone, shingles, wood, or siding; • Knee braces; and • Towers. The building features several complementary materials, including white stucco, grey siding, and grey ledgestone veneer. Other features include glass balcony railings, black vinyl recessed windows, balconies, and a 3:12 pitch slate-grey standing- seam metal roof. Project complies. E.3 Maximum Coverage 60% of total project net developable acreage. Proposed building coverage is 52% of the net lot area (0.16 acres). Project complies. E.4 Maximum Building Height Same as required by the underlying zone, and not to exceed three stories (1)(7) The project is located within the BAOZ, and therefore pursuant to Footnote #1 below, building height shall be subject to the requirements of C.M.C. Chapter 21.82.050, which states that no residential structure shall exceed 30 feet when providing a minimum 3:12 roof pitch, or 24 feet when providing less than a 3:12 roof pitch. The project is proposing a building height of 30’ with a 3:12 roof pitch. Project complies. Projects within the R- 23 general plan designation (1)(7) 40 feet, if roof pitch is 3:12 or greater N/A. The project is located within the BAOZ. Therefore, pursuant to Footnote #1 below, building height shall be subject to the requirements of C.M.C. Chapter 21.82 as discussed above. The building does not exceed three stories. Project complies. 35 feet, if roof pitch is less than 3:12 Building height shall not exceed three stories PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS (CMC SECTION 21.45.080) TABLE E: CONDOMINIUM PROJECTS REF. NO. SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT STANDARD COMPLIANCE COMMENT E.5 Minimum Building Setbacks From a private or public street(2)(3) Residential structure 10 feet The proposed building does not have direct-entry garages and the proposed front yard setback is 15 feet. Project complies. Direct entry garage 20 feet From a drive- aisle(4) Residential structure (except as specified below) 5 feet, fully landscaped (walkways providing access to dwelling entryways may be located within required landscaped area) N/A. Project is less than 25 units and located within the R-23 General Plan designation (see section below for compliance). Residential structure – directly above a garage 0 feet when projecting over the front of a garage. N/A. Project is less than 25 units and located within the R-23 General Plan designation (see section below for compliance). Garage 3 feet N/A. Project is less than 25 units and located within the R-23 General Plan designation (see section below for compliance). Garages facing directly onto a drive-aisle shall be equipped with an automatic garage door opener. Projects of 25 units or less within the R- 15 and R-23 general plan designations 0 feet (residential structure and garage) N/A Garages facing directly onto a drive-aisle shall be equipped with an automatic garage door opener. The project is required to comply with all applicable sections of the Zoning Ordinance. Balconies/ decks (unenclosed and uncovered) 0 feet N/A May cantilever over a drive-aisle, provided the balcony/deck complies with all other applicable requirements, such as: • Setbacks from property lines • Building separation • Fire and Engineering Department requirements From the perimeter property lines of the project site (not adjacent to a public/private street) The building setback from an interior side or rear perimeter property line shall be the same as required by the underlying zone for an interior side or rear yard setback. The underlying zone for the project is R-3. The required interior side yard setback for R-3 is 10% of the lot width or 5 feet for this property. The project has an interior side yard setback of 5 feet along both sides. The required rear yard setback for R- 3 is double the interior side yard or 10 feet for this property. The project provides a rear yard setback of 10 feet. Project complies. E.6 Minimum Building Separation 10 feet N/A E.7 Resident Parking (6) All dwelling types If a project is located within the R-23 general plan designation, resident parking shall be provided as specified below, and may also be provided as follows: • 25% of the units in the project may include a tandem two-car garage (minimum 12 feet x 40 feet). N/A PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS (CMC SECTION 21.45.080) TABLE E: CONDOMINIUM PROJECTS REF. NO. SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT STANDARD COMPLIANCE COMMENT • Calculations for this provision resulting in a fractional unit may be rounded up to the next whole number. One-family and two- family dwellings 2 spaces per unit, provided as either: • a two-car garage (minimum 20 feet x 20 feet), or • 2 separate one-car garages (minimum 12 feet x 20 feet each) • In the R-W Zone, the 2 required parking spaces may be provided as 1 covered space and 1 uncovered space (5) N/A Multiple- family dwellings Studio and one-bedroom units 1.5 spaces per unit, 1 of which must be covered (5) N/A When calculating the required number of parking spaces, if the calculation results in a fractional parking space, the required number of parking spaces shall always be rounded up to the nearest whole number. Units with two or more bedrooms 2 spaces per unit, provided as either: • a one-car garage (12 feet x 20 feet) and 1 covered or uncovered space; or(5) • a two-car garage (minimum 20 feet x 20 feet), or • 2 separate one-car garages (minimum 12 feet x 20 feet each) • In the R-W Zone and the Beach Area Overlay Zone, the 2 required parking spaces may be provided as 1 covered space and 1 uncovered space (5) Each unit proposes a two-car garage with minimum interior dimensions of 20’x20’. Project complies. Required parking may be provided within an enclosed parking garage with multiple, open parking spaces, subject to the following: • Each parking space shall maintain a standard stall size of 8.5 feet by 20 feet, exclusive of supporting columns; and • A backup distance of 24 feet shall be maintained in addition to a minimum 5 feet turning bump-out located at the end of any stall series. N/A Required resident parking spaces shall be located no more than 150 feet as measured in a logical walking path from the entrance of the units it could be considered to serve. All three units provide internal garage access. Project complies. E.8 Private Recreational Space One-family, two-family, and multiple- family dwellings Required private recreational space shall be designed so as to be functional, usable, and easily accessible from the dwelling it is intended to serve. All three units have required private recreational space located adjacent to the unit and exclusive to each unit. Project complies. Required private recreational space shall be located adjacent to the unit the area is intended to serve. Required private recreational space shall not be located within any required front yard setback area, and may not include any driveways, parking areas, storage areas, or common walkways. PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS (CMC SECTION 21.45.080) TABLE E: CONDOMINIUM PROJECTS REF. NO. SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT STANDARD COMPLIANCE COMMENT One-family and two- family dwellings Minimum total area per unit Projects not within the R- 15 or R-23 general plan designations 400 square feet N/A Projects within the R-15 or R-23 general plan designations 200 square feet May consist of more than one recreational space. N/A May be provided at ground level and/or as a deck/balcony on a second/third floor or roof. N/A If provided at ground level Minimum dimension Not within the R-15 or R- 23 general plan designations 15 feet N/A Within the R- 15 or R-23 general plan designations 10 feet Shall not have a slope gradient greater than 5%. N/A Attached solid patio covers and decks/balconies may project into a required private recreational space, subject to the following: • The depth of the projection shall not exceed 6 feet (measured from the wall of the dwelling that is contiguous to the patio/deck/balcony). The length of the projection shall not be limited, except as required by any setback or lot coverage standards. N/A Open or lattice-top patio covers may be located within the required private recreation space (provided the patio cover complies with all applicable standards, including the required setbacks). N/A If provided above ground level as a deck/ balcony or roof deck Minimum dimension 6 feet N/A Minimum area 60 square feet Multiple-family dwellings Minimum total area per unit (patio, porch, or balcony) 60 square feet The project exceeds the minimum 60 square-foot requirement for each unit. Project complies. Minimum dimension of patio, porch or balcony 6 feet The balconies and/or patios counted towards the minimum requirement have at least a 6-foot dimension. Project complies. Projects of 11 or more units that are within the R-23 general plan designation may opt to provide an N/A PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS (CMC SECTION 21.45.080) TABLE E: CONDOMINIUM PROJECTS REF. NO. SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT STANDARD COMPLIANCE COMMENT additional 75 square feet of community recreation space per unit (subject to the standards specified in Table C of this Chapter), in lieu of providing the per unit private recreational space specified above. (1) If a project is located within the Beach Area Overlay Zone, building height shall be subject to the requirements of Chapter 21.82 of this code. (2) See Table C in Section 21.45.060 for required setbacks from an arterial street. (3) Building setbacks shall be measured from the outside edge of the required street right-of-way width, whichever is closest to the building. (4) Building setbacks shall be measured from one of the following (whichever is closest to the building): a) the outside edge of the required drive-aisle width; b) the back of sidewalk; or c) the nearest side of a parking bay located contiguous to a drive- aisle (excluding parking located in a driveway in front of a unit’s garage). (5) Any uncovered required parking space in the R-W zone may be located within a required front yard setback and may be tandem. (6) This standard does not apply to housing for senior citizens (see Chapter 21.84 of this code). (7) Protrusions above the height limit shall be allowed pursuant to Section 21.46.020 of this code. Such protrusions include protective barriers for balconies and roof decks. CITY COUNCIL POLICY 66 – LIVABLE NEIGHBORHOODS Principle Compliance Comments 1 Building Facades, Front Entries, Porches Facades create interest and character and should be varied and articulated to provide visual interest to pedestrians. Clearly identifiable front doors and porches enhance the street scene and create opportunities for greater social interaction within the neighborhood. Building entries and windows should face the street. Front porches, bay windows, courtyards and balconies are encouraged. The project proposes a well- articulated front façade with multiple architectural features and multiple complimentary finishes creating visual interest. The front door for the front unit is oriented towards Cherry Avenue. Project complies. 2 Garages Homes should be designed to feature the residence as the prominent part of the structure in relation to the street. A variety of garage configurations should be used to improve the street scene. This may include tandem garages, side- loaded garages, front-loaded garages, alley-loaded garages and recessed garages. The project proposes a drive-aisle along the side of the building, which improves the street scene by side-loading the garages. Project complies. 3 Street Design An interconnected, modified (grid) street pattern should be incorporated into project designs when there are no topographic or environmental constraints. Interconnected streets provide pedestrians and automobiles many alternative routes to follow, disperse traffic and reduce the volume of cars on any one street in the neighborhood. Streets should be designed to provide both vehicular and pedestrian connectivity by minimizing the use of cul-de-sacs. The street network should also be designed to create a safer, more comfortable pedestrian and bicycling environment. Local residential streets should have travel and parking lanes, be sufficiently narrow to slow traffic, provide adequate access for emergency and service vehicles and emergency evacuation routes for residents and include parkways with trees to form a pleasing canopy over the street. Local residential streets are the public open space in which children often play and around which neighborhoods interact. Within this context, vehicular movement should be additionally influenced through the use of City-accepted designs for traffic calming measures. The proposed project is a three-unit attached condominium within a 0.16-acre lot. Street design is not applicable to this project. ATTACHMENT 5 4 Parkways Street trees should be planted in the parkways along all streets. Tree species should be selected to create a unified image for the street, provide an effective canopy, avoid sidewalk damage and minimize water consumption. A conceptual landscape plan has been reviewed and deemed complete by the city. The project is conditioned to require final landscape plan approval and comply with all applicable requirements. 5 Pedestrian Walkways Pedestrian walkways should be located along or visible from all streets. Walkways (sidewalks or trails) should provide clear, comfortable and direct access to neighborhood schools, parks/plazas and transit stops. Primary pedestrian routes should be bordered by residential fronts, parks or plazas. Where street connections are not feasible (at the end of cul-de-sacs), pedestrian paths should also be provided. The proposed project is a three-unit attached condominium within a 0.16-acre lot. Pedestrian walkways beyond the subject private property are not applicable to this project. 6 Centralized Community Recreation Areas Park or plazas, which serve as neighborhood meeting places and as recreational activity centers should be incorporated into all planned unit developments. As frequently as possible, these parks/plazas should be designed for both active and passive uses for residents of all ages and should be centrally located within the project. Parks and plazas should be not be sited on residual parcels, used as buffers from surrounding developments or to separate buildings from streets. The proposed project is a three-unit attached condominium within a 0.16-acre lot. Centralized community recreation areas are not applicable to this project. SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSZ1.0 SITE PLAN VICINITY MAP ©N 3FIRE HYDRANT MAP NSITE PLAN 1 4GENERAL NOTES 2SHEET INDEX DI DONATO ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTURE + GRAPHICS 3939 FIRST AVENUE · SUITE 100 · SAN DIEGO · CA 92103 619.299.4210 · 619.299.4250 FAX · DDAMAIL@AOL.COM R E V I S I O N SP R O J E C T N A M EI S S U E S A R C H I T E C Ta THESE DESIGNS,DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF DDA AND SHALL NOT BE USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY OTHER WORK EXCEPT BY AGREEMENT WITH DDA.THERE SHALL BE NO CHANGES OR DEVIATION WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF DDA. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED ON THE JOB SITE. ANY DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE DDA PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORK.S H E E T I N F O R M A T I O N 1726 THREE ON CHERRY THREE ON CHERRYPUD 2018-0008/SDP 2018-0016/CDP 2018-0041/MS 2018-0012N 2VICINITY MAP ATTACHEMNT 6 BEDROOM 1 BEDROOM 1 BEDROOM 1 T & B FOYER FOYER FOYER T & B T & B GARAGE (UNIT A)GARAGE (UNIT B)GARAGE (UNIT C) S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S SSGUEST PARKING SSWWWWNGROUND FLOOR PLAN 1 DI DONATO ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTURE + GRAPHICS 3939 FIRST AVENUE · SUITE 100 · SAN DIEGO · CA 92103 619.299.4210 · 619.299.4250 FAX · DDAMAIL@AOL.COM R E V I S I O N SP R O J E C T N A M EI S S U E S A R C H I T E C Ta THESE DESIGNS,DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF DDA AND SHALL NOT BE USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY OTHER WORK EXCEPT BY AGREEMENT WITH DDA.THERE SHALL BE NO CHANGES OR DEVIATION WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF DDA. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED ON THE JOB SITE. ANY DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE DDA PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORK.S H E E T I N F O R M A T I O N 1726 THREE ON CHERRY THREE ON CHERRYPUD 2018-0008/SDP 2018-0016/CDP 2018-0041/MS 2018-0012Z2.0 GROUND FLOOR PLAN UNIT A UNIT B KITCHEN KITCHEN LIVING AREA DINING AREA DINING AREA DINING AREA KITCHEN LIVING AREA UNIT C DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK LIVING AREA NSECOND FLOOR PLAN 1 DI DONATO ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTURE + GRAPHICS 3939 FIRST AVENUE · SUITE 100 · SAN DIEGO · CA 92103 619.299.4210 · 619.299.4250 FAX · DDAMAIL@AOL.COM R E V I S I O N SP R O J E C T N A M EI S S U E S A R C H I T E C Ta THESE DESIGNS,DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF DDA AND SHALL NOT BE USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY OTHER WORK EXCEPT BY AGREEMENT WITH DDA.THERE SHALL BE NO CHANGES OR DEVIATION WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF DDA. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED ON THE JOB SITE. ANY DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE DDA PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORK.S H E E T I N F O R M A T I O N 1726 THREE ON CHERRY THREE ON CHERRYPUD 2018-0008/SDP 2018-0016/CDP 2018-0041/MS 2018-0012Z2.1 SECOND FLOOR PLAN MASTER BDRM BEDROOM 2 UNIT C MASTER BDRM BEDROOM 2 T & B BEDROOM 2 MASTER BDRM W-I-C DEN DECK DECK T & B T & BT & B T & B DEN W-I-CUNIT A UNIT B T & B W-I-C DECK W W W W MASTER BDRM BEDROOM 2 UNIT C MASTER BDRM BEDROOM 2 T & B BEDROOM 2 MASTER BDRM W-I-C DEN DECK DECK T & B T & BT & B T & B DEN W-I-CUNIT A UNIT B T & B W-I-C DECK W W W W Z2.2 THIRD FLOOR PLANNTHIRD FLOOR PLAN 1 DI DONATO ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTURE + GRAPHICS 3939 FIRST AVENUE · SUITE 100 · SAN DIEGO · CA 92103 619.299.4210 · 619.299.4250 FAX · DDAMAIL@AOL.COM R E V I S I O N SP R O J E C T N A M EI S S U E S A R C H I T E C Ta THESE DESIGNS,DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF DDA AND SHALL NOT BE USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY OTHER WORK EXCEPT BY AGREEMENT WITH DDA.THERE SHALL BE NO CHANGES OR DEVIATION WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF DDA. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED ON THE JOB SITE. ANY DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE DDA PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORK.S H E E T I N F O R M A T I O N 1726 THREE ON CHERRY THREE ON CHERRYPUD 2018-0008/SDP 2018-0016/CDP 2018-0041/MS 2018-0012 Z2.3 ROOF PLANNROOF PLAN 1 DI DONATO ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTURE + GRAPHICS 3939 FIRST AVENUE · SUITE 100 · SAN DIEGO · CA 92103 619.299.4210 · 619.299.4250 FAX · DDAMAIL@AOL.COM R E V I S I O N SP R O J E C T N A M EI S S U E S A R C H I T E C Ta THESE DESIGNS,DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF DDA AND SHALL NOT BE USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY OTHER WORK EXCEPT BY AGREEMENT WITH DDA.THERE SHALL BE NO CHANGES OR DEVIATION WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF DDA. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED ON THE JOB SITE. ANY DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE DDA PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORK.S H E E T I N F O R M A T I O N 1726 THREE ON CHERRY THREE ON CHERRYPUD 2018-0008/SDP 2018-0016/CDP 2018-0041/MS 2018-0012 Z3.0 SOUTHEAST & NORTHWEST ELEVATIONS 1SOUTHEAST ELEVATION DI DONATO ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTURE + GRAPHICS 3939 FIRST AVENUE · SUITE 100 · SAN DIEGO · CA 92103 619.299.4210 · 619.299.4250 FAX · DDAMAIL@AOL.COM R E V I S I O N SP R O J E C T N A M EI S S U E S A R C H I T E C Ta THESE DESIGNS,DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF DDA AND SHALL NOT BE USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY OTHER WORK EXCEPT BY AGREEMENT WITH DDA.THERE SHALL BE NO CHANGES OR DEVIATION WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF DDA. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED ON THE JOB SITE. ANY DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE DDA PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORK.S H E E T I N F O R M A T I O N 1726 THREE ON CHERRY THREE ON CHERRYPUD 2018-0008/SDP 2018-0016/CDP 2018-0041/MS 2018-0012 Z3.1 SOUTHEAST & NORTHWEST ELEVATIONS DI DONATO ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTURE + GRAPHICS 3939 FIRST AVENUE · SUITE 100 · SAN DIEGO · CA 92103 619.299.4210 · 619.299.4250 FAX · DDAMAIL@AOL.COM R E V I S I O N SP R O J E C T N A M EI S S U E S A R C H I T E C Ta THESE DESIGNS,DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF DDA AND SHALL NOT BE USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY OTHER WORK EXCEPT BY AGREEMENT WITH DDA.THERE SHALL BE NO CHANGES OR DEVIATION WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF DDA. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED ON THE JOB SITE. ANY DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE DDA PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORK.S H E E T I N F O R M A T I O N 1726 THREE ON CHERRY THREE ON CHERRYPUD 2018-0008/SDP 2018-0016/CDP 2018-0041/MS 2018-00121NORTHWEST ELEVATION Z3.2 NORTHEAST ELEVATION 1NORTHEAST ELEVATION DI DONATO ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTURE + GRAPHICS 3939 FIRST AVENUE · SUITE 100 · SAN DIEGO · CA 92103 619.299.4210 · 619.299.4250 FAX · DDAMAIL@AOL.COM R E V I S I O N SP R O J E C T N A M EI S S U E S A R C H I T E C Ta THESE DESIGNS,DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF DDA AND SHALL NOT BE USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY OTHER WORK EXCEPT BY AGREEMENT WITH DDA.THERE SHALL BE NO CHANGES OR DEVIATION WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF DDA. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED ON THE JOB SITE. ANY DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE DDA PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORK.S H E E T I N F O R M A T I O N 1726 THREE ON CHERRY THREE ON CHERRYPUD 2018-0008/SDP 2018-0016/CDP 2018-0041/MS 2018-0012 Z3.3 SOUTHWEST ELEVATION 1SOUTHWEST ELEVATION DI DONATO ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTURE + GRAPHICS 3939 FIRST AVENUE · SUITE 100 · SAN DIEGO · CA 92103 619.299.4210 · 619.299.4250 FAX · DDAMAIL@AOL.COM R E V I S I O N SP R O J E C T N A M EI S S U E S A R C H I T E C Ta THESE DESIGNS,DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF DDA AND SHALL NOT BE USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY OTHER WORK EXCEPT BY AGREEMENT WITH DDA.THERE SHALL BE NO CHANGES OR DEVIATION WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF DDA. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED ON THE JOB SITE. ANY DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE DDA PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORK.S H E E T I N F O R M A T I O N 1726 THREE ON CHERRY THREE ON CHERRYPUD 2018-0008/SDP 2018-0016/CDP 2018-0041/MS 2018-0012 From:Chris Stoughton To:Planning Subject:160 Cherry Avenue Project Date:Thursday, May 28, 2020 12:17:46 PM One follow up question concerning the 160 Cherry Avenue Project: I am wondering when the builder plans on beginning the project so that we can plan accordingly? Thank youChris Stoughton CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Esteban Danna To:Chris Stoughton Cc:Don Neu; Planning Subject:Re: 160 Cherry Avenue Project Date:Thursday, May 28, 2020 3:58:02 PM Chris,  My best guess is that the earliest they can start would probably be sometime in August. I am not familiar with this builder. Aside from permits, it is hard to say what other variables (loans, construction crews, procurement of materials, etc.) are at play when it comes to breaking ground.  Regards,  Esteban From: Chris Stoughton <stoughtoncs@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2020 3:00 PM To: Esteban Danna <Esteban.Danna@carlsbadca.gov> Cc: Don Neu <Don.Neu@carlsbadca.gov>; Planning <Planning@CarlsbadCA.gov> Subject: Re: 160 Cherry Avenue Project   Hi Esteban, Thank you for this information which is very helpful.  Just two follow up questions: 1. What is the earliest possible start date if they do everything as early as possible?2. In your experience and your knowledge of this particular builder, what would be your expectation on when this particular project will most likely begin? Best,Chris On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 2:03 PM Esteban Danna <Esteban.Danna@carlsbadca.gov> wrote: Hi Chris,  Typically, these types of projects take 1-2 years to build, but it all depends on the developer. They are typically interested in finishing the project as soon as they can so they can sell the units. Disruption and pollution during construction are regulated by the Building Division and you can contact them at building@carlsbadca.gov if you want to know more about regulations on construction pollution, noise, and parking. As far as construction timing for this project, once the Planning Commission approves the project, the developer can request grading and building permits. The process for those can take 1-2 months, but it is really dependent on how quickly the developer puts together all the plans and documents that are required for permit issuance. Once permits are issued, the developer has to request a building inspection at least once every 6 months. Otherwise, the permit expires.  I hope this answers your questions. Please let me know if you have additional questions.  Regards,  Esteban   From: Planning <Planning@CarlsbadCA.gov> Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2020 12:40 PM To: Esteban Danna <Esteban.Danna@carlsbadca.gov> Cc: Don Neu <Don.Neu@carlsbadca.gov> Subject: FW: 160 Cherry Avenue Project       From: Chris Stoughton <stoughtoncs@gmail.com>  Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2020 12:15 PM To: Planning <Planning@CarlsbadCA.gov> Subject: 160 Cherry Avenue Project   Concerning the proposed project at 160 Cherry Avenue:   I live on Cherry Avenue right across the street from the proposed project.  We have had non-stop construction on this street for the last several years which has been a major disruption and constant noise pollution.  The project on the corner of Cherry Avenue and Garfield has been going on for three years.   Considering this, I am wondering how long the builder plans on taking to complete the project?  There should be a shorter time-frame for these projects so that they don't drag on for many years as the project on the corner has done.  These construction projects cause serious disruption, parking constraints, and noise pollution with numerous health effects on the neighbors.   Second, I am wondering what the builder is planning on doing to minimize noise pollution and parking?     Thank you for taking these comments and questions into consideration in the approval of this project.   Best, Chris Stoughton CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Chris Stoughton To:Planning Subject:160 Cherry Avenue Project Date:Thursday, May 28, 2020 12:14:57 PM Concerning the proposed project at 160 Cherry Avenue: I live on Cherry Avenue right across the street from the proposed project. We have had non- stop construction on this street for the last several years which has been a major disruption andconstant noise pollution. The project on the corner of Cherry Avenue and Garfield has been going on for three years. Considering this, I am wondering how long the builder plans on taking to complete theproject? There should be a shorter time-frame for these projects so that they don't drag on for many years as the project on the corner has done. These construction projects cause seriousdisruption, parking constraints, and noise pollution with numerous health effects on the neighbors. Second, I am wondering what the builder is planning on doing to minimize noise pollution andparking? Thank you for taking these comments and questions into consideration in the approval of this project. Best,Chris Stoughton CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Esteban Danna To:Planning Subject:FW: 160 Cherry Ave Date:Wednesday, June 03, 2020 3:35:15 PM   From: Ron Horan <rhoran@live.com>  Sent: Wednesday, June 3, 2020 15:22 To: Esteban Danna <Esteban.Danna@carlsbadca.gov> Subject: Re: 160 Cherry Ave   That was complete bullshit.  You asked for comments but never unmuted us to allow comment.  Nor did your letter state we needed a sentence allowing it to be read during the hearing.   I have never seen such a poorly run meeting.  You all should be ashamed.   Ron Horan From: Ron Horan <rhoran@live.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 3, 2020 5:17 PM To: Esteban Danna <Esteban.Danna@carlsbadca.gov> Subject: Re: 160 Cherry Ave   Estaban,   I am on the call and there is no way for me to comment nor did anyone say I had to put in the first sentence that my letter should be read.   This is wrong.   Please let me say my piece.   Ron Horan   From: Esteban Danna <Esteban.Danna@carlsbadca.gov> Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2020 3:21 PM To: Jeannette Horan <janhoran27@gmail.com> Cc: Ron Horan <rhoran@live.com> Subject: RE: 160 Cherry Ave   Hi Jeannette, Please see the proposed plans attached. The developer has not indicated if the trees are being removed or not. Please let me know if you have further questions.  Regards,  Esteban Esteban Danna Associate Planner Community Development Department Planning Division City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 www.carlsbadca.gov 760-602-4629| 760-720-8560 fax | Esteban.Danna@carlsbadca.gov DURING THE CURRENT PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY: FOR ONGOING PROJECTS, PLEASE CONTACT YOUR PROJECT PLANNER TO SCHEDULE A RESUBMITTAL DROP-OFF APPOINTMENT.  FOR NEW PROJECT SUBMITTALS AND LANDSCAPE SUBMITTALS/RESUBMITTALS/ASBUILTS, PLEASE CALL OR EMAIL YOUR REQUEST FOR A SUBMITTAL DROP-OFF APPOINTMENT: Phone: 760-602-4610  Email: planning@carlsbadca.gov -----Original Message----- From: Jeannette Horan <janhoran27@gmail.com>  Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2020 09:42 To: Esteban Danna <Esteban.Danna@carlsbadca.gov> Cc: Ron Horan <rhoran@live.com> Subject: 160 Cherry Ave Hi Ms. Esteban. We received a notice in the mail about the public hearing regarding the property proposed to be built at 160 Cherry Ave. We just bought the place directly behind 160 Cherry Ave - late March 2020. Is there a way to view the plans for this property? Would like to know specifically what the fate of the large tree would be that butts up to our property. It’s a huge tree that provides complete privacy for our neighbor and partial privacy for us. Thank you. Jeannette Horan . Carlsbad, CA 92008 CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Esteban Danna To:Ron Horan Cc:Planning Subject:RE: 160 Cherry Ave Date:Wednesday, June 03, 2020 3:20:40 PM Ron,   Forwarding your email to the correct inbox (copied herein).   Esteban     Esteban Danna Associate Planner Community Development Department Planning Division City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 www.carlsbadca.gov   760-602-4629| 760-720-8560 fax | Esteban.Danna@carlsbadca.gov   DURING THE CURRENT PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY: FOR ONGOING PROJECTS, PLEASE CONTACT YOUR PROJECT PLANNER TO SCHEDULE A RESUBMITTAL DROP-OFF APPOINTMENT. FOR NEW PROJECT SUBMITTALS AND LANDSCAPE SUBMITTALS/RESUBMITTALS/ASBUILTS, PLEASE CALL OR EMAIL YOUR REQUEST FOR A SUBMITTAL DROP-OFF APPOINTMENT: Phone: 760-602-4610 Email: planning@carlsbadca.gov   From: Ron Horan <rhoran@live.com>  Sent: Wednesday, June 3, 2020 15:17 To: Esteban Danna <Esteban.Danna@carlsbadca.gov> Subject: Re: 160 Cherry Ave   Estaban,   I am on the call and there is no way for me to comment nor did anyone say I had to put in the first sentence that my letter should be read.   This is wrong.   Please let me say my piece.   Ron Horan   From: Esteban Danna <Esteban.Danna@carlsbadca.gov> Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2020 3:21 PM To: Jeannette Horan <janhoran27@gmail.com> Cc: Ron Horan <rhoran@live.com> Subject: RE: 160 Cherry Ave   Hi Jeannette, Please see the proposed plans attached. The developer has not indicated if the trees are being removed or not. Please let me know if you have further questions.  Regards,  Esteban Esteban Danna Associate Planner Community Development Department Planning Division City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 www.carlsbadca.gov 760-602-4629| 760-720-8560 fax | Esteban.Danna@carlsbadca.gov DURING THE CURRENT PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY: FOR ONGOING PROJECTS, PLEASE CONTACT YOUR PROJECT PLANNER TO SCHEDULE A RESUBMITTAL DROP-OFF APPOINTMENT.  FOR NEW PROJECT SUBMITTALS AND LANDSCAPE SUBMITTALS/RESUBMITTALS/ASBUILTS, PLEASE CALL OR EMAIL YOUR REQUEST FOR A SUBMITTAL DROP-OFF APPOINTMENT: Phone: 760-602-4610  Email: planning@carlsbadca.gov -----Original Message----- From: Jeannette Horan <janhoran27@gmail.com>  Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2020 09:42 To: Esteban Danna <Esteban.Danna@carlsbadca.gov> Cc: Ron Horan <rhoran@live.com> Subject: 160 Cherry Ave Hi Ms. Esteban. We received a notice in the mail about the public hearing regarding the property proposed to be built at 160 Cherry Ave. We just bought the place directly behind 160 Cherry Ave - late March 2020. Is there a way to view the plans for this property? Would like to know specifically what the fate of the large tree would be that butts up to our property. It’s a huge tree that provides complete privacy for our neighbor and partial privacy for us. Thank you. Jeannette Horan Carlsbad, CA 92008 CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.   YIMBY Law  1260 Mission St  San Francisco, CA 94103  hello@yimbylaw.org     6/3/2020    Carlsbad Planning Commission  City Council Chamber  1200 Carlsbad Village Drive  Carlsbad, CA 92008    planning@carlsbadca.gov; clerk@carlsbadca.gov;   Via Email      Re: 160 Cherry Avenue  PUD 2018-0008, SDP 2018-0016, MS 2018-0012    Dear Carlsbad Planning Commission,    YIMBY Law submits this letter to inform you that the Planning Commission has an obligation                to abide by all relevant state housing laws when evaluating the above captioned proposal,               including the Housing Accountability Act (HAA).     California Government Code § 65589.5, the Housing Accountability Act, prohibits localities  from denying housing development projects that are compliant with the locality’s zoning  ordinance or general plan at the time the application was deemed complete, unless the locality  can make findings that the proposed housing development would be a threat to public health  and safety. The most relevant section is copied below:    (j) When a proposed housing development project complies with applicable, objective general plan              and zoning standards and criteria, including design review standards, in effect at the time that the                 housing development project's application is determined to be complete, but the local agency              proposes to disapprove the project or to approve it upon the condition that the project be developed                  at a lower density, the local agency shall base its decision regarding the proposed housing                development project upon written findings supported by substantial evidence on the record that              both of the following conditions exist:    (1) The housing development project would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public               health or safety unless the project is disapproved or approved upon the condition that the                project be developed at a lower density. As used in this paragraph, a "specific, adverse                impact" means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on            objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they              existed on the date the application was deemed complete.    (2) There is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact               identified pursuant to paragraph (1), other than the disapproval of the housing development              project or the approval of the project upon the condition that it be developed at a lower                  density.    . . .        (4) For purposes of this section, a proposed housing development project is not inconsistent               with the applicable zoning standards and criteria, and shall not require a rezoning, if the                housing development project is consistent with the objective general plan standards and             criteria but the zoning for the project site is inconsistent with the general plan. If the local                  agency has complied with paragraph (2), the local agency may require the proposed housing               development project to comply with the objective standards and criteria of the zoning which               is consistent with the general plan, however, the standards and criteria shall be applied to                facilitate and accommodate development at the density allowed on the site by the general               plan and proposed by the proposed housing development project.    The applicant proposes to demolish an existing single-family residence and construct a             three-unit, residential air-space condominium project on a 16-acre site located at 160 Cherry              Avenue.    The above captioned proposal is zoning compliant and general plan compliant, therefore, your              local agency must approve the application, or else make findings to the effect that the                proposed project would have an adverse impact on public health and safety, as described               above.    Yimby Law is a 501(c)3 non-profit corporation, whose mission is to increase the accessibility               and affordability of housing in California.    I am signing this letter both in my capacity as the Executive Director of YIMBY Law, and as a                    resident of California who is affected by the shortage of housing in our state.     Sincerely,      Sonja Trauss  Executive Director  YIMBY Law    YIMBY Law, 1260 Mission St, San Francisco, CA 94103  From:Ron Horan (ronhoran) To:Planning Cc:Jeannette Horan Subject:CASE NAME: PUD 2018-0008/SDP 2018-0016/CDP 2018-0041/MS 2018-0012 (DEV2018-0022) - Three on Cherry Date:Tuesday, June 02, 2020 3:28:04 PM Dear Carlsbad Planning Commission, Please allow me to introduce myself. My name is Ronald Horan, Vice President of Marketing for Luxtera Inc., a Carlsbad-based company that was recently purchased by Cisco Networks in 2019. As an interesting aside, Luxtera won last year’s Carlsbad Recycling Award and I was the recipient. We remain very active in the Carlsbad community and will continue to do so as part of Cisco Networks. I am also the recent owner of which is adjacent to the subject property, Three on Cherry. My home would look directly into the proposed condo units. I have the following concerns, questions, and requests regarding this new property: 1. Per the plans you sent out, the subject property will be constructed 10 feet from our shared fence line. Additionally, this property will be three stories in height meaning it will directly overhang (look into) my backyard, first and second floors. Needless to say, I have a lot at stake that the developers get this right. My understanding is constructing three condo units on a single lot may not require a variance. I would like to understand if this is true. My developer, The Edwards Group, cited to me this would indeed require a variance stating and I quote “It would be ridiculous to cram three condos on such a small lot”. Based upon the plans, the developer plans to consume every allowable square inch of the lot which is a concern. In contrast, the condos constructed at 163, 165, 167, and 169 Acacia were built on two lots; thus maintaining the two units per lot approach. Please advise if building three condo units on a single lot is allowable. 2. There currently exists a California Pepper Tree on the property line separating my property from Three on Cherry. My understanding is this tree is > 20 years old and I would estimate it is at least 30 feet tall. In addition to the natural beauty it provides the City of Carlsbad and the neighborhood, it also serves to provide important privacy for me and the other owners in our building. Much of the reason I purchased this property is due to the privacy and beauty it affords. As I review the plans, there appears to be no landscaping suggestion that this tree would remain. Given the 10 foot setback and the size of the tree, I struggle to believe this new building can be constructed, as defined by the plans, without killing or removing the tree. As a staunch environmentalist it is difficult for me to understand the City of Carlsbad would consider allowing this for no other reason than its environmental impact. While the Commission may agree to approve this construction, I would propose it become conditional that the tree remain, undamaged including roots. If for some reason the tree is destroyed during construction, the developer agrees to replace at its cost the existing tree with a new tree of similar height and width. I would also request a landscaping plan with this tree included. Jeannette and I recently relocated to this property from Del Mar because we believe Carlsbad is an upcoming city with an extremely bright future. We are not against progress but do believe it should be executed with the spirit of improving our scenic city and environment. Constructing a property that consumes every inch of greenspace is counter to this goal. I plan to attend the meeting on June 03, but please feel free to contact me if you have questions or comments. Thank you for the opportunity to submit my input under this process. Best Regards, Ronald Horan Vice President, Luxtera LLC., A Cisco Networks Company Phone: Email: ronhoran@cisco.com CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:salton0611@gmail.com To:Planning Subject:RE: Case -Three on Cherry Date:Tuesday, June 02, 2020 12:46:42 PM To the Planning Commission Subject: 1. PUD 2018-0008/SDP 2018-0016/CDP 2018-0041/MS 2018-0012 (DEV2018-0022) – THREE ON CHERRY My wife and I live at adjacent to the planned development “Three on Cherry.” We are understanding and supportive of the desire of the owners to develop their property. While it is unfortunate that Carlsbad Village is losing some of its unique character that is the economic reality of the situation. We do believe, however, that in its development we do not lose the environmental and scenic legacy of the property. Consequentially, we are strongly suggesting that as much of the mature trees and plants on the property be maintained and protected. We are especially concerned about the trees at the back of the lot that provide privacy and sun protection to the adjacent properties. It will take many years for these to grow anew. Thank you Alan and Vicki Salton , Carlsbad, CA From: Bob Adamo <bobadamo@icloud.com> Sent: Tuesday, June 2, 2020 11:07 AM To: planning@carlsbadca.gov Subject: Case -Three on Cherry Dear Planning Commission, I’d first like to introduce myself and my wife Melanie. We recently purchased which is part of a 4 unit townhome. The subject property on Cherry is directly on the other side of my rear fence. Our property has about a 20’ setback and our property was constructed on 2 combined lots. I understand that this construction may maximize every limit of the code to get pre-approval, which none of us were aware of since our structure is new and Acacia was under construction at the time. There is one important aspect that wasn’t addressed on the plans. What was the intent of the builder to keep the 20 + year old, stunning pepper trees in the proposed back yard. It was the biggest reason we bought our property. It provides a noise barrier between multiple adjacent condo’s and town homes, and privacy between the backside of our building. The four families living in the Acacia building, live there as our primary residence. I attached pictures from inside my house. The plans do not show if in fact these trees will remain. Maybe that was his intent but we need that clarified. If not, with this new new structure 10 ‘ away from our fence it needs screening since it will be looking into our rooms and yards. This is a problem for us unless the builder mitigates the issue. The plans also do not show the current fence between our property on Acacia. We hope we can come up with a resolution so that we all have a win-win. Thank you, Bob & Melanie Adamo . I CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Bob Adamo To:Planning Subject:Case -Three on Cherry Date:Tuesday, June 02, 2020 11:07:03 AM Dear Planning Commission, I’d first like to introduce myself and my wife Melanie. We recently purchased which is part of a 4 unit townhome. The subject property on Cherry is directly on the other side ofmy rear fence. Our property has about a 20’ setback and our property was constructed on 2combined lots. I understand that this construction may maximize every limit of the code to get pre-approval,which none of us were aware of since our structure is new and Acacia was under construction atthe time. There is one important aspect that wasn’t addressed on the plans. What was the intent ofthe builder to keep the 20 + year old, stunning pepper trees in the proposed back yard. It was thebiggest reason we bought our property. It provides a noise barrier between multiple adjacentcondo’s and town homes, and privacy between the backside of our building. The four familiesliving in the Acacia building, live there as our primary residence. I attached pictures from inside my house. The plans do not show if in fact these trees will remain. Maybe that was his intent but we needthat clarified. If not, with this new new structure 10 ‘ away from our fence it needs screening sinceit will be looking into our rooms and yards. This is a problem for us unless the builder mitigatesthe issue. The plans also do not show the current fence between our property on Acacia. We hope we can come up with a resolution so that we all have a win-win. Thank you, Bob & Melanie Adamo. I CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.