design review subcommittee (drsc)

AGENDA ITEM: 2-A

Design Review Subcommittee (DRSC)

Meeting Date: July 10, 2019

PLANNER: Stephanie Roxas, AICP, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Specific Plan Amendment 19-014, Tentative Parcel Map 19-021, Site

Plan Permit 19-022, Architectural Permit 19-023, and Conditional Use Permit 19-094 – Artis Memory Care Facility, a request to develop a 72-bed memory care assisted living residence on 2.5-acres of a vacant parcel located at APN 679-021-05, adjacent to the Pacific Coast Church at 2651 Calle Frontera.

BACKGROUND:

The project site is vacant and abuts the I-5 freeway to the south, single-family residences to the north, multi-family condominiums to the east (Faire Harbour), and Pacific Coast Church to the west. A location map is provided in Attachment 1. The project site is located in the Institutional area of the Marblehead Inland Specific Plan, and the General Plan Land Use Element designates the site as Institutional. An excerpt of the Specific Plan is provided in Attachment 2 for reference. The site is owned by Pacific Coast Church. If the project is approved, the applicant, Artis Senior Living of San Clemente LLC, intends to purchase the site. The general project boundaries is depicted in Figure 1.

Figure 1 – Aerial Map

Artis Memory Care Facility Other developments have been proposed on the project site. In 2004, the Planning Commission approved a master campus plan allowing the demolition of the existing church building and expansion and phased construction of a new church facility comprised of three buildings. The project was never built, and the entitlements expired. Most recently, Lennar proposed a General Plan land use and Marblehead Inland Specific Plan zone change from Institutional to Residential Medium to construct a 75-unit townhome development with a proposed density of 13.9 dwelling units per acre. During the development review process, the applications were withdrawn. Why is DRSC Review Required? The proposed development requires a Specific Plan Amendment (SPA), Tentative Parcel Map (TPM), Site Plan Permit (SPP), Architectural Permit (AP), and Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Zoning Ordinance, Section 17.12.025 requires DRSC review of the SPP and AP. DRSC review is required to advise applicants on how projects can best comply with policies and/or design guidelines that relate to visual impact issues, such as site planning, architecture, and landscaping. The Subcommittee’s recommendation will be forwarded to the Planning Commission. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant proposes the construction and operation of a single-story, 72-bed State-licensed residential care facility for the elderly afflicted with Alzheimer’s disease and related memory disorders. The proposal consists of a 37,717 square foot building with 42 surface parking spaces. The proposal includes subdividing 2.5 acres of vacant land at the southwest corner of Calle Frontera and Calle Ola Verde. Access to the project site would be from Calle Frontera. The 2.5-acre project site is currently part of a 5.6-acre parcel that would be split via a proposed Tentative Parcel Map. The applicant proposes to construct an access driveway wholly-contained on the adjacent parcel, which would serve both the project and future development on the remaining vacant parcel. Project plans are provided as Attachment 5. The memory care facility would be divided into four unique residential “neighborhoods” each containing a communal living room, den, residential kitchen, and dining room where meals are served. By creating smaller-scale spaces, the “neighborhoods” are intended to ease resident anxiety through familiar surroundings. All rooms are private studios approximately 250 square feet in size. The facility also includes a “town center” that connects the four neighborhoods. The “town center” features a community center, studio space for large gatherings and activities, barber/beauty salon, and health center. The facility would be staffed 24 hours a day, 7 days a week with 45 employees and three employee shifts. For the residents’ safety, the proposed facility would be fully secured with perimeter fencing and locked gates, up to 8 feet in height. Two outdoor courtyards are proposed in the building center that provide open space, walking paths, and seating areas in a secure setting. Along the west elevation, a larger enclosed garden is proposed with resident-safe landscaping.

Artis Memory Care Facility ANALYSIS: Development Standards The proposed use is considered a type of congregate care facility, which is defined in the Zoning Ordinance as “a facility for senior citizens, that is arranged in a group setting and includes independent living and sleeping accommodations in conjunction with shared dining and recreational facilities. No congregate care units shall contain kitchens.” Zoning Ordinance Section 17.28.110 (Attachment 3) establishes special use regulations for congregate care facilities. However, this section primarily refers to the development standards of the underlying zone. The Marblehead Inland Specific Plan establishes minimal standards for the Institutional planning area, which are summarized in Table 1 below.

Table 1 – Applicable Development Standards

Development Standard

Marblehead Inland SP Proposed Complies

with SP? Primary Building Setback:

Front Yard 20 ft. 40 ft. Yes Side Yard 10 ft. 15 ft. Yes Rear Yard 20 ft. 60 ft. Yes

Building Height 25 ft. maximum 25 ft. Yes

Walls, Fences, Hedges 6 ft. maximum Up to 8 ft. No, included with SPA

Parking* 51 spaces 42 spaces

To be determined based on

study

* The Zoning Ordinance requires congregate care facilities to provide one covered space for every two units, and one guest parking space for each five units. However, exceptions to the parking requirements substantiated by a parking study may be approved through the discretionary review required for the congregate care facility.

The proposed SPA would allow flexibility in the height limitation for walls, fences, and hedges, which would be determined as part of the discretionary permit. The applicant is preparing a parking study to determine the anticipated parking demand for the use. The Specific Plan does not regulate lot coverage, lot size/width, density, or landscaping. Furthermore, Section 17.28.110 specifies development standards for residential, nonresidential, and mixed-use zones; the Zoning Ordinance does not specify development limitations for institutional zones. Overall, institutional uses, such as the proposed memory care facility, are intended to be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Through the discretionary review process, the City may establish additional development limitations given the project’s specific site conditions, surrounding land uses, and compatibility with the area.

Artis Memory Care Facility Architecture As illustrated in Figure 2 below, the project utilizes a Cape Code-style architecture. Architectural details include: cement fiber horizontal siding, gable roofs with vertical siding, asphalt roof shingles, and vertical trellises and contrasting trim for architectural relief.

Figure 2 – Perspective from Calle Frontera

The applicant describes the project’s design concept as follows: “Simple finishes and materials are employed to articulate the traditional seaside architecture. The colonial dialect features a neutral palette which is enlivened with white-painted decorative moldings, latticework and pedimented porches supported by classical columns. Pitched roofs with hip and gable elements further define the character of building’s serviceable wings and promote the essence of a domestic architecture.” Renderings illustrating the proposed project are provided in Attachment 4. Perimeter Fencing Due to the nature of the memory care facility, a perimeter fence is required for the residents’ safety and security. The proposed fence would enclose three sides of the development along the north, south, and east elevations. The west elevation includes the main building entrance with a receptionist desk that would limit access into/out of the facility. The proposed fence varies from 6’-10” to 8’-0” in height. Staff worked with the applicant to develop a fencing design that would balance security needs with aesthetic concerns and maintaining the residential character of the area. Initially, staff requested use of a see-through fence material, such as wrought iron. However, the applicant cited safety concerns (i.e., residents may attempt to leave the facility). The current proposal incorporates an “open” design at the top 1’-2” of the fence. The spacing between the vertical slats breaks up the mass of the fence and allows for more building visibility. Along the Calle Frontera frontage, the project is at a lower grade than street level, so the majority of the fence faces the interior of the development. Trees and shrubs would be planted to further soften the appearance of the fence from street view. Along the freeway frontage, the grade level of the site is approximately 20 feet higher than the freeway, thereby making the project highly visible from the freeway. The applicant

Artis Memory Care Facility proposes a split fence design with a clear acrylic 4’-0” tall panel atop a solid vinyl fence. Staff supports the proposed split fence design as it reduces potential massing impacts and reveals more of the building architecture from the freeway perspective. Design Guidelines and General Plan Consistency The Marblehead Inland Specific Plan does not contain design guidelines, and the Citywide Design Guidelines do not address institutional uses. Furthermore, the site is not in the Architectural Overlay so the project is not required to feature Spanish Colonial Revival architecture. In reviewing the architectural merit of the project, staff assessed whether the project was consistent with general guidelines that address issues such as site planning, architecture, neighborhood compatibility, and landscaping. Table 2 below is an analysis of the project’s consistency with applicable Design Guidelines and General Plan policies.

Table 2 – Design Guidelines and General Plan Policies

Design Guideline / General Plan Policy Project Consistency 1. Development proposals should

demonstrate an effort to retain significant existing natural features. Existing topography, drainage courses, vegetation, and public views should be [considered]. (Design Guidelines II.3)

Consistent. The existing site is located approximately 20 feet above the grade level of the freeway. To improve public views from the freeway, the perimeter fence along the freeway frontage uses a split design with a transparent acrylic panel atop a solid vinyl fence. Existing vegetation along Calle Frontera and Calle Ola Verde will be maintained and has been incorporated into the project.

2. Design of buildings to be compatible in scale, mass and form with adjacent structures and the pattern of the neighborhood. (Design Guidelines II.B.3)

Consistent. The project uses a Cape Cod-style architectural design in a neutral earth tone color palette. The project was designed to complement the existing Pacific Coast Church building, who own the property. The proposed single-story building is a less intense scale of development relative to the adjacent two-story Faire Harbour condominiums. The project uses design elements, such as horizontal siding and asphalt roof shingles, which are consistent with Faire Harbour.

3. Provide a transition from existing to new development by careful placement and massing of buildings, well-designed planting patterns, and other appropriate means. (Design Guidelines II.A.2)

Consistent. The applicant reached out to the Homeowners’ Association for the adjacent Faire Harbour condominium complex with opportunities to provide feedback on the project design. In response to the HOA’s feedback, the applicant worked with the Orange County

Artis Memory Care Facility

Design Guideline / General Plan Policy Project Consistency Fire Authority to locate fire access gates in locations that would not remove on-street parallel parking spaces.

4. Locate off-street parking and service areas to minimize visibility from the street. (Design Guidelines II.A.5)

Consistent. The parking lot is oriented towards the rear of the property and is not visible from the street. Service areas, such as the trash enclosure and emergency generator, are located in a portion of the parking lot that are not visible from the street or freeway.

5. UD‐3.03. Buffers and Setbacks. “We require that new uses and buildings, characterized by differing functions, activities, density, scale and massing, provide conditions of approval, landscaped buffers and/or setbacks between uses to prevent or reduce adverse impacts.”

Consistent. A large enclosed garden is proposed along the Calle Ola Verde frontage. The proposed layout provides a large setback between the project and existing condominium development. Furthermore, the proposed building is setback over 60 ft. from the Caltrans right-of-way. The parking lot is oriented towards the rear to provide a buffer between the freeway and proposed facility.

RECOMMENDATIONS: Overall, the project is consistent with applicable Design Guidelines and General Plan policies, although the City’s regulatory documents contain minimal guidance on the development of new institutional uses. The project is compatible with the scale and density of the area in that the development includes a single, one-story building under the height limit (25 feet) established for the Institutional area of the Marblehead Inland Specific Plan. Furthermore, the applicant has reached out to the Faire Harbour Homeowners’ Association, who expressed support for the project. However, staff believes the architectural quality and design of the project can be improved. The following recommendations were provided to the applicant during the Development Management Team’s (DMT) review of the project. The applicant requested to proceed with the design review process to incorporate any additional feedback from the DRSC before revising the project. 1. Remove the cupolas and redesign these elements into dormers to break up the roof

mass and create roof variation. The proposed pre-manufactured cupolas are disproportionate to the size and scale of the overall building, and, consequently, staff recommends removing these architectural elements as have a “tacked on” appearance.

2. Simplify the west elevation to eliminate the cluttered appearance and create more visual

relief. The proposed west elevation contains multiple windows, wall plane breaks, and

Artis Memory Care Facility

vinyl espaliers. Staff recommends removing a few proposed espaliers and converting the double gable elements (proposed at both ends of the west elevation) into single roof gables.

3. Incorporate additional design elements along the south, north, and east elevations to

ensure consistent architecture along all elevations. The west elevation is heavily articulated compared to the other elevations. Staff recommends adding window openings, incorporating window shutters, and/or adding vertical trellis frames on the other elevations.

4. Revise the building elevations to break up the roof plane and/or ridge. Staff recommends

incorporating chimneys and/or dormers to create more variation in the roof mass. 5. Redesign the main building entrance on the west elevation to create a more prominent

entrance that is easily distinguished within the development. Staff recommends increasing the building height, changing the hipped roof to a front gable roof, and expanding the vertical wood siding.

6. Redesign the building elevations to create a heavier weight and scale to the ground floor

of the building, relative to the roof elements. Staff recommends increasing the height of the fascia and reducing the overall size of the roof plane. Alternatively, you may consider converting the pyramid hip roofs into front gables and expanding the horizontal wood siding.

7. Revise the columns proposed on the south and north elevations to ensure a consistent

column width is used. An asymmetrical design is proposed with some columns more narrow in width than others.

8. Utilize a different color palette to be more consistent with traditional forms of colonial

style architecture. Staff recommends eliminating “Monterey Taupe” as the main building color, and using a lighter earth tone or blue color (consistent with the abutting Faire Harbor development).

The applicant intends to provide conceptual sketches at the DRSC meeting to illustrate how these recommendations could be incorporated into the project. CONCLUSION

Staff seeks DRSC concurrence with the above recommendations and welcomes additional input. DRSC’s comments will assist the applicant in developing a project of high architectural quality and design. Furthermore, staff seeks DRSC direction on whether the project’s design is ready for Planning Commission consideration after recommended modifications are incorporated, or if additional DRSC review is recommended.

Artis Memory Care Facility Attachments:

1. Location Map 2. Marblehead Inland Specific Plan excerpt 3. Zoning Ordinance Section 17.28.110 – Congregate Care Facilities 4. Renderings 5. Project Plans

ATTACHMENT 1

City of San ClementeProject: Artis Memory Care FacilityAddress: Calle Frontera & Calle Ola Verde (APN 679-021-05)

E0 180 36090

Feet Feet

Marblehead Inland Master Specific Plan The Lusk Company

Prepared for:

The City of San Clemente Contact: Bob Goldin, Principal Planner

Prepared by:

=+d 59dq.WrlIi.m 5%- m.&.ocSm

14725 Alton Parkway lrvine, CA 92718

February 1989

Revised May 20,1941

Area 5 Front Yard Setback Note Added (Page 6) Highland Llght Estates Tracts

10685 and 10862 Height Retrlctions Revised (Pager 9 and 10)

Revised November 19,1991

Added Provisions lo Drvelopmml Standards ior Curkom Horner (Tract 13913) at The Summit at Highland Lighl

(Approved by the San Cleinente City Council on 12-18-91) Added Height Reitrictioni mfoimauon ior Signal Pointe (Area 5).

ATTACHMENT 2

- Excerpt -


INTRODUCTION

In 1979, the City of San Clemente approved the development plan for the Marblehead Inland development with a zoning designation of 0-S (PRD), in . . conformance with Sections 4.21 . . ( 0 4 ) and 4.24 J lmnd Resldenbal (PRD) of the San Clemente Zoning Ordinance.

In June 1981,aSupplemental Environmental Impact Report was certified by the SanClementeCity Council for theproposedTractMapno. 10687. This allowed the construction of the 192 "affordable" multi-family unit project known as Lanesboro which was approved by the City of San Clemente as a density bonus (Condition of Approval No. 38 of the Tentative Tract 8818). These units are included in the total unit count but not the density calculations.

In 1984, The Lusk Company revised certain portions of the approved Master Planand Specific Plan, inaccordance with the requirements and procedures set forth in the PRD regulations. The revised Marblehead Master Plan was approved by the City of San Clemente in 1984, and is included as Page 4 of this booklet. Upon approval of the Marblehead Inland Planned Community, all revised land uses weredesignated 0-S (PRD) with theexception of the institutional use site (church site) and perimeter open space which was designated O- S only. It should be noted that PRD requirements, including the contents of Master Plans and Specific Plans, differ from the requiremergts of the Develop- ment District (D-D) Ordinance, which is the General Plan designation for the other backcountry ranch areas in the City of San Clemente.

The approved Marblehead Master Plan provides for 1335 dwelling units, based upon an overall base density of 1.5 dwelling units per acre over the total project area of 762 acres plus a density bonus of 192 dwelling units for affordable housing.

Following is a summary of approval and construction dates for the various developments in Marblehead Inland:

Faire Harbour Unit Count: 144 Approvals - Marblehead Specific Plan (1980)

- Recorded as Tract 10686 on February 29,1980

Construction Dates - 1981 through 1984

Note: Residents are subject to the CC&R's of the Faire Harbour Homeowners Association and the Marblehead Community Association (Master-Association) (Sub-Association).

Lanesboro Unit Count: 192 Approvals - Marblehead Specific Plan (1979)

-Recorded as Tract 10687 on February 29,1980

Construction Dates - 1983

Notes: 'This is an affordable rental housing development with a requirement to remain as rental units for ten years. After that period these units may remain rented or be sold as~condominiums. 'No sub-~omeowne's Associationexists at this time,although residents aresubject to the rules and regulations of the current landlord, The Lusk Company, and the Marblehead Community Association (Master Association).

Highland Light (Area 1) Unit Count: 95 Approvals - Marblehead Specific Plan (1980)

-Recorded as Tracts 10685 and 10862 on February 29,1980

Construction Dates - 1982-1985

Note: Residents are subject to theCC&R's of theHighland Light Homeowners Association and the Marblehead Community Association (Master-Association) (Sub-Association).


New Providence (Area 4) Unit Count: 225 Approvals -New Providence Specific Plan (1984)

-Recorded as Tracts 12154 Uune 28,1985) and 12160 (August 9,1984)


Note: Residents aresubject to theCC&R'sof theNew Providence Homeown- ers Association and the Marblehead Community Association (Master- Association) (Sub-Association).

The Villages of Highland Light (Area 3) Unit Count: 258 Approvals - Marblehead Area 3 Specific Plan (1985)

-Recorded as Tract 12167 (October 31,1986), Tract 12252 (July 16,1985) and Tract 12253 (October31,1986)


Note: Residents are subject to the CC&R's of the Highland Light Villages Association and the Marblehead Community Association (Master-As- sociation) (Sub-Association).

The Summit at Highland Light (Area 2) Unit Count: 68 Approvals - Marblehead Specific Plan (1980)

- Recorded as Tract 10880 on February 29,1980 (Phases 1 & 2) -Tentative Tract 13943 Approved March 6,1991 (Phase 3, 16 Units)

Anticipated Construction Dates - 1989-91

Signal Pointe (Area 5 ) Unit Count: 188 Approvals -Area 5 Specific Plan (1988)

- Approved as Tentative Tract 13054 on March 2,1988 - Anticipate two Final Tract Maps

Anticipated Construction Dates - 1990-91

Institutional Use Site Approximately 5 Acres Approvals - Marblehead Inland Master Plan (1984)

-Recorded as Parcel Map 84-827 -Recorded as Parcel Map 88-141

Anticipated Construction Dates - Day Care Center (?); Church Sites (?)

PURPOSE

This document is intended to provide the basic development standards included in the previously approved individual area Specific Plans which are within the Marblehead Inland Planned Community. The basic development requirements summarized on the Development Standards Chart (Exhibit C ) include: building setbacks, building heights for attached structures and detached structures, height and setbacks of fences, walls and hedges. Such standards have been approved and are requirements of the City of San Cle- mente and therefore, are subject to City Staff review and approval prior to construction.

It should be noted that Plot Plans, LandscapePlans,Pool Plans, Mechanical and Solar Energy Plans, Exterior Colors and Finishes, and/or any other standards that are not covered on the Development Standards Chart (Exhibit C) are not City requirements but are the concern and responsibility of the Marblehead Community Association. Please refer to the Marblehead Community Associa- tion Architectural Standards for necessary procedures and approvals.

Page 2

roxass

Highlight

. . ~

Marblehead Inland Master Specific Plan .

A The Lusk Company -

APPROXIMATE PLANNING AREAS LAND USE NO OFDU'S

Fa~re Harbour Townhomes and Stacked Flats 144

Lanesboro Stacked Flats 192

Churches. Day Care Facilities 0

Reservolr Slte Area 1, Highland Light Single Family 95

mil single ~ ~ ~ i l ~ 68

Natural Open Space Village Homes 258

Area 4, New Providence Patio Homes 225

Single Family 188 Homes

Not to Exceed 1335'

based on the Open Space Planned Residential ich allows 1.5 d.u.lacre x 762 (number of acres) =

43 plus 192 affordable dwelling units (bonus density) - 1335.

1000' \ I INSTITUTIONAL

&--- Proposed Avenlda Vista Hermosa Freeway Interchange

JN 24663-2068

Exhibit A EXISTING MASTER PLAN

Page 4

roxass

Rectangle


Area Description

Approx. Approx. Net Approx. Approx. Approx. No. Gross Percent Acreage at Gross Net

of D.U.'s Acreage of Total 75% of Gross Density Densih,

I Exlstlng Uses (Under construction or constructed and occupied or for sale)

Faire Harbour Multi Family - Attached Condominiums 144 20.0 (Stacked FlatslTownhomes)

2.0 15.0 7.2 9.6

0 Lanesboro Multi Family - Apartments 192 16.0 2.1 12.0 12.0 16.0

Single Family Highland Light, Area 1 60, min, lots 95 40.0 5.3 30.0 2.4 3.2

Highland Light Single Family Village Homes - 258 60.0 7.8 45.0 4.3 Singie Family Detached Condominiums Villages, Area 3

5.7

New Providence, Area 4, Single Family Patio Homes - 225 44.0 5.8 33.0 5.1 Single Family Detached Condominiums

6.8

II Future Uses

Institutional Churches, Day Care Center Facilities 0 10.0 1.3 7.5 NIA NIA

Area 2 Single Family Homes 68 24.0 3.2 18.0 2.1 2.8

Area 5 Single Famly Homes 188 56.0 7.3 42.0 3.0 4.3

TOTAL Not to Exceed 1335

Ill PubllclOpen Space Uses -

School Site -

Park Site -

Avenida Vista Herrnosa -

Calle Frontera

Natural Open Space plus Perimeter Landscaped

-

Manufactured Ooen Soace

PERIMETER OPEN SPACE SUMMARY

Natural Open Space 408 Acres

Landscaoed Manufactured Ooen Soace 50 Acres (includeb reservoirs, ~egunde ~eshecha improvements and perimeter slopes) 458 Acres"

"open Space areas have not been included for Lanesboro. Faire Harbour. Institutional Use (Church Site), the school and park site or any of the intenor pianning areas.

. ,

Exhibit B SUMMARY OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED LAND USES

JN 24663.2068 Page 5

roxass

Rectangle


BUILDING HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS

NOTES: A Refer to The Marblehead C o m w ~ i t y Association Manual for dewlopmcnt standards no1

indicated on this chart.

SUBDIVISION STANDARDS

Attached Structures (Maximum)")

WALLS, HEQGES,

B. All p lmshould have written approval by the Marblehead Community Homeowners Assmiation prior to review by City of SanClementestnff.

01 New

Providence

(11

Lanesboro

(I) ~ e s i d e n t k uses only i21 Limited lo Institutional uscsonlv.

Signal (1)

Pointe Area 5

(1) Faire

arbo our

i t ) Highland

Light

See Exhlhm D through C iar Bu8lding Heighl Reqiiirrrrmnts for each specii~c de\,elaprneni.

FRONT YARD (Maximum Height) SIDE YARD (Maximum Height)

REAR YARD (Maximum Heieht)

~, (3) Attached structures include room additions, chimneys, greenhouses, etc. (4) Detached accessory structurcj include patio covers, guzebos, gucst houses, ctr (51 The acce~table materials for walls and fences mlude the falluwin~:

(2)

Institutional

(1) Highland

Light Villages

The Summit at (1) Highland Light

25' Detached Accessory Structures (Maximum)"' 1 10'

6' 18)

6' 6'

a. Wood, except grape stake b. Slump block c. Stucco applied to masonr) d. Wroueht iron bars

Tract Homes

6' 1s)

6' 6'

" e. Clear and "on-patterned tempered glass or plexlglass. f. Any other material must be approved by the respective assocmtion and the

Custom Lots

IVl

(71

(7)

6' '3)

6' 6'

city of San Clemente. 161 Anv fence. wall or heder whch would block thc view fromother residences shall be

10' 1 9' I N/A 9'

~ -

suGrct to ;he approva lo f~hr Marblehead Community Association Architectural Committw Rctainin~ wdlls are also subject to the approval of the Architectural

9' I N/A I N/A I 10'

N / A

N/A

N / A

Committee (7) No fence, wall or railing in Faire Harbour shall be removed, altered or changed in m y

manner without having been approved in writing by Ule Marblehead Community

113)

6' h'

Archtectural Committee

JN 24663-2068

(8) Fences, walls and hedges shall not exceed SIX (6) feet in height, except rvilhin six (6) feet of the front property line a maximum height of thirty-SIX (.X) mches shall not be exceeded.

(91 See twical dotting Exhibits H for New Providence and I for Highland Lieht Villvees.

031

6' 6 "41

,. . (l0i Zero lot line - sid&ard setback required on one sldc of resldencc only. See ~ x h i l i i i ~ . (11) Refer to E x l b ~ t "1" (page 16), Site Plan for Tract 13943, for minimum setback requirements fur

all structures on the custom lob in the Summit. Minimum setbacks are shown on thesite Plan in the form of building envelopes. The burlding envelopes do not represent maximum building area. The maximum building area of each lot is equal to a Floor Area Ratio of 0.60 (60%), being the ratio that the squarcfoatage of the covercd floor area bears to the net pad square footage, of each lot. In addition, the maximum total building coverage (as defined by the C q of San Clcmente I'lanning Department) for lots IS and 16 of Tract 13943 shall not exceed 50% of thc net pad square footage.

(12) Per the approved Area 5 Site I'lan, Architectural nuu r Plan No. 1 has a minimum 8' front yard setback to Ulc primary residence structure (not garage). Plans 2,3, and 4 and garages on all Plans (1-4) have a minimum 18' setback.

(13) Fences, walls and hedges in The Summit shall not exceed six (6) feet in height, except within twenty (20) feet of the front property line where a maximum height of thirty-six (36) inches shall not be exceeded.

(14) Solid fences, walls and hedges exceeding 3 6 in height shall not be permittedivithin ten (111) feet of any rear yard top of slope. Transparent or wrought iron fencmgmaterials may not exceed slx (6) feet in height at rear yard top of slope.

Exhibit C

SUMMARY OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Page 6

ISJ

6' h'

6' 16)

3'6" 1s'

6' 18)

roxass

Highlight


GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS

Setbacks: Minimum setback standards for overall Marblehead Inland arc established by thecity of SanClementePlanning Commission in conformance with the applicable City building and zoningcodes. Thesetback standards are contained in the individual specific plans for the Marblehead Inland Dcvelop- ment and are shown in the matrix within this booklet. These standards affect all improvements including but not limited to: buildings, out-buildings, garages, carports, pools/spas, recreation facilities, parking areas, awnings, patio covers, greenhouses, balconies, stairs and sundccks. I t is the responsibility of theMarblehead Inland ArchitecturalCommittee tointerpret and approve ordisapproveimprovement plansina mannerconsistent with theseminimum standards prior to review by the City of San Clemcntc.

Please note that setbacks for pools/spas/hot tubs are not listed in the Marble- headCommunityAssociationArchitecturalStandardsManual. TheCity ofSan ClementeZoningCodestatesthatany swimmingpool, fishpond,orotherbody of water which contains water eighteen (18) inches or more in depth, for use in connection with any permitted use shall beat least five ( 5 ) fect from any side or rear property line. Pool equipment, air conditioningunits, heatingequipmcnt, water heaters and soft water tanks and their required enclosures, shall not be closer than 5 feet to any property line and shall not be allowed in the required front yard.

Height Requirements

AttachedStmctures: Maximumheightsforattached structuresincludingroom additions, garages, etc. will be less than the hcight of the highest point on the roof line of the residential dwelling unit. Refer to the Subdivision Standards Chart (Exhibit C) or Exhibits D through G for the minimum and maximum height requirements of each development in Marblehead Inland.

Detached Structures: Maximum heights for detached structures which include out-buildings, patio covers, trellises and gazebos shall be limited to 10' in most areas. Refer to the Standards Chart (Exhibit C) for specific areas.

Fences, Walls and Hedges

The following are standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual:

*Fences, wallsand hedges shall not exceed six ( 6 ) feet in hcight in sidcand rear yards. See Exhibit " C , page 6, for further restrictions on fences, walls and hedges in front yards.

A n y fence, wall or hedge which would significantly affect the view fromother lots shall be subject to the approval of the Architectural Comniittee. Retaining wallsshall be subject to the approval of the Architectural Committee. TheCity of San Clcmente will not enforce this provision.

*Fences, walls and hedges which will abut any existing wall or fence shall not exceed the established hcight of the existing wall or fencc, except heights rcquired by building codes for protection of swimming pools or spas.

* A non-climbable fence or wall, five ( 5 ) fect in hcight, is required completely cnclosingany swimming pool, fish pond, orany body of watcr, which contains watcr eighteen (18) inchcsor more in depth, and all p t c s shall be self-latching, openable from the inside only. A building wall may be part of such enclosure.

'Windbreaks and soundscreens are considered to be fences.

The acceptable types of materials for walls and fences include:

Wood, slump block, stucco, wrought iron bars, clear and non-patterned tcm- percd glass or plexiglass and the continuation of the exterior wood finishes from thcbuildingsorothermaterialsasapproved by the Marblehead Commu- nity Association Architectural Committee.

The unacceptable types of materials are chain link fencc, poultry wire, alumi- num sheet or metal, plastic rope, concrete blocks (plain or painted) and grape stake fences.

Page 7

- 1 -

SAN CLEMENTE MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 17 - ZONING

Section 17.28.110 - Congregate Care Facilities.

A. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of this section is to ensure that congregate care facilities do not adversely impact the surrounding neighborhoods and that they are developed in a manner which protects the health, safety, and general welfare of the nearby residents and business, while providing for the housing needs of an important segment of the community.

B. Review Requirements. Please refer to the use tables in Chapters 17.32, Residential Zones and Standards, through 17.48, Public Zones and Standards, of this title.

C. Minimum Standards in Residential Zones. Congregate care facilities located in a residential zones shall conform to the development standards required by that zone, as follows:

1. Building Height, Maximum. Projects shall comply with the maximum height limits of the zone. Exceptions may be granted in zones where the maximum height limit is more restrictive than 45 feet, in accordance with Subsection (F), from the development standards of this section, provided that no portion of the building shall exceed 45 feet. Any building exceeding one story shall include elevators.

2. Lot Area Per Dwelling Unit, Maximum. Projects shall comply with the maximum density limitations of the zone. Even though congregate care units do not meet the definition of dwelling units, the units shall be evaluated as dwelling units for the purpose of regulating density. Exceptions may be granted, as provided for in Subsection (E)(1), Minimum Standards for all Zones, Development Density, and (F), Required Findings for Exceptions from the Development Standards, of this section.

3. Lot Coverage, Maximum. Projects shall comply with the maximum lot coverage limitations of the zone. Exceptions may be granted, in accordance with Subsection (F), Required Findings for Exceptions from the Development Standards, of this section, as follows:

a. For new facilities, the maximum coverage shall not exceed 80 percent;

b. For the conversion of existing buildings to congregate care facilities, the maximum lot coverage allowed may be the existing lot coverage.

4. Lot Size, Minimum. Projects shall comply with the minimum lot size requirements of the zone. Exceptions may be granted in accordance with Subsection (F), Required Findings for Exceptions from the Development Standards, of this section, for the conversion of existing buildings to congregate care facilities.

5. Lot Width, Minimum. Projects shall comply with the minimum lot width requirements of the zone. Exceptions may be granted in accordance with Subsection (F), Required Findings for Exceptions from the Development Standards, of this section, for the conversion of existing buildings to congregate care facilities.

6. Setback Areas, Front, Side and Rear Yard. Projects shall comply with the minimum setback requirements of this zone. Exceptions may be granted in accordance with

ATTACHMENT 3

- 2 -

Subsection (F), Required Findings for Exceptions from the Development Standards, of this section, as follows:

a. For new facilities, no setback area shall be less than five feet from the property line; and

b. For the conversion of existing buildings to congregate care facilities, setbacks equal to the existing setbacks may be allowed.

7. Other Requirements. Please refer to Subsection (E), Minimum Standards for All Zones, of this section.

D. Minimum Standards in Nonresidential or Mixed-Use Zones. Congregate care projects located in a nonresidential or mixed-use zone shall conform to the following development standards:

1. Building Height, Maximum. Projects shall comply with the height limits of the zone. Exceptions may be granted for projects in zones where the maximum height limit is more restrictive than 45 feet, in accordance with subsection (F), Required Findings for Exceptions from the Development Standards, of this section, provided that no portion of the building shall exceed 45 feet.

2. Lot Coverage, Maximum. The maximum lot coverage shall be 80 percent. Exceptions may be granted, in accordance with Subsection (F), Required Findings for Exceptions from the Development Standards, of this section, for the conversion of existing buildings to congregate care facilities.

3. Lot Size, Minimum. The minimum lot size shall be 6,000 square feet. Exceptions may be granted, in accordance with Subsection (F), Required Findings for Exceptions from the Development Standards, of this section, for the conversion of existing buildings to congregate care facilities.

4. Setbacks.

a. Front Yard Setbacks. 10 feet, exceptions may be granted provided that no setback area shall be less than five feet;

b. Rear Yard Setback. Five feet abutting residentially zoned property; zero abutting nonresidential or mixed-use zoned property;

c. Side Yard Setback. 10 feet abutting residentially zoned property; zero abutting commercially or mixed-use zoned property.

5. Other Requirements. Please refer to the standards for congregate care facilities in all zones Subsection (E), Minimum Standards for All Zones, of this section.

E. Minimum Standards for All Zones.

1. Development Density. The maximum density for a congregate care project shall be determined as follows:

a. Residential Zones. Within residential zoning districts, the density shall not exceed that allowed by the zone in which the project is located, as determined by the minimum lot area required for each dwelling unit. Exceptions may be granted based on the merits of the project, provided that the density does not exceed 45 dwelling units per net acre.

- 3 -

b. Mixed Use and Nonresidential Zones. The appropriate density shall be decided through the Conditional Use Permit process for the facility; however, density shall not exceed 45 dwelling units per net acre.

2. Parking.

a. Manager's Unit. Two parking spaces shall be provided for each manager's unit. Manager's units shall also be included in calculating guest parking.

b. Congregate Care Units. One covered space for every two residential units within a congregate care project. In addition, one guest parking space for each five dwelling units shall be provided on site. Guest parking in any project that has secured parking facilities shall be made separately accessible to the guests. All required parking shall be available to the residents of the project at no fee.

Exceptions to the parking requirements substantiated by a parking study may be approved through the discretionary review required for the congregate care facility.

3. State Law. All congregate care facilities shall comply with the provisions of State law.

F. Required Findings for Exceptions from the Development Standards. In return for the developer's agreement to provide housing for senior citizens in accordance with this section, the decision-making authority may grant exceptions to the development standards within the limitations established in subsections within this section and by the City of San Clemente General Plan, if such exceptions can be justified and the following findings can be made:

1. In granting a reduction in the amount of required parking to be provided, the decision-making authority shall find that such reduction will not result in any adverse impact to the surrounding neighborhood due to excessive on-street parking, increased traffic congestion, or impaired vehicular or pedestrian circulation, in the vicinity of the congregate care project.

2. In granting an increase in the development density allowed within a zoning district, the decision-making authority shall find that the additional density will not result in any adverse impacts to the surrounding neighborhood due to the addition of more residents than the area can reasonably accommodate.

3. In granting an increase in building height, a reduction in required building setbacks, lot size and/or width, and/or an increase in the amount of lot coverage, the decision-making authority shall find that such increase and/or decrease will not result in any adverse impacts to adjacent properties due to an encroachment of building elements that would reduce such property's access to light and air, the privacy enjoyed by the adjacent residents, or otherwise reduce the reasonable use of the property.

G. Required Findings for Approval. Prior to approval of the Discretionary Permits to allow congregate care project, the following findings shall be made along with the general findings required for the Discretionary Permit:

1. The location of the project will afford the residents of the project convenient access to civic and commercial facilities and services available in the community.

2. Any additional findings required in granting exceptions to the provisions of this section, as prescribed in Subsection (F), Required Findings for Exceptions From the Development Standards, of this section.

(Ord. 1314 § 18, 2006; Ord. 1172 § 3 (part), 1996)

ATTACHMENT 4

design review subcommittee (drsc)

Documents