To: Zoning Administrator
From: Planning and Building Department
Agenda Section: Consent
SUBJECT:
title
Coza Coastal Development Permit and Special Permit Modification
Record Number: PLN-2024-18985MOD01
Assessor Parcel Numbers: 110-251-037 and 110-251-038
Shelter Cove area
A Modification to a previously approved Coastal Development Permit (CDP) and Special Permit (SP). The previous project included the construction of an approximately 1,719 square-foot two-story, two-bedroom single-family residence. The Modification will change the design to an A-Frame and reduce the square footage to approximately 1,599 square feet. The residence will be within the same footprint of the previously approved permit. The parcel will be served by community water provided by the Resort Improvement District and an on-site wastewater treatment system.
end
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Recommendation
That the Zoning Administrator:
Adopt the resolution (Attachment 1) which does the following:
1. Finds that the proposed project complies with the South Coast Area Plan and Zoning Ordinance; and
2. Finds the project exempt from CEQA pursuant to Sections 15303 and 15304 of the CEQA Guidelines, and that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment; and
3. Approves the Coastal Development Permit and Special Permit Modification subject to the conditions of approval (Attachment 1A).
Body
DISCUSSION:
Project Location: The project site is located in the Shelter Cove area, on the southwest side of Blueridge Road, approximately 3,000 feet southeast of the intersection of Blueridge Road and Hemlock Road, on the properties known as 634 and 644 Blueridge Road
Present General Plan Land Use Designation:
Residential Low Density (RL), South Coast Area Plan (SCAP), Density: 3 to 7 dwelling units per acre, Slope Stability: Moderate Instability (2).
Present Zoning: Residential Single Family, with a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet, with a Development Standard reducing yard setback requirements, Qualified, with a Design Review combining zone (RS-5-S1-Q/D).
Environmental Review:
Project is exempt from environmental review per Sections 15303(a) (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) and 15304(i) (Minor Alterations to Land) of the CEQA Guidelines. Project has been previously approved under PLN-2024-18985.
State Appeal:
Project is appealable to the California Coastal Commission.
Major concerns:
None
Executive Summary: A Modification to a previously approved Coastal Development Permit (CDP) and Special Permit (SP). The previous project included the construction of an approximately 1,719 square-foot two-story, two-bedroom single-family residence. Under the previous permit two properties were merged into a single parcel. The Modification will change the design of the residence to an A-Frame and reduce the square footage to approximately 1,599 square feet. The residence will be within the same footprint of the previously approved permit. The parcel will be served by community water provided by the Resort Improvement District and an on-site wastewater treatment system
A Biological Survey for the site was conducted by Redwood Community Action Agency in June of 2024 (Attachment 2A). The results of the survey are summarized as follows. No special status plant or animal species were observed within the project area. The habitat within the property was marginally suitable for Sonoma tree vole due to the few mature Douglas-fir trees, and unsuitable for the northern spotted owl. The site was dry, thus unsuitable for hydrophilic plant species. Habitat was either unsuitable or atypical for the remaining vascular plant species on the California Natural Diversity Database list, likely in part due to the disturbed nature of the site. The area was too dry to support amphibian species of concern.
Recommendations within the Biological Survey Report include the following: 1) Trees to be removed from the property, especially the larger Douglas-fir in the defensive perimeter, should be removed outside the nesting season to avoid disruption of nesting activities, and 2) If possible, the larger Douglas-fir that may be in the defensive wildfire perimeter should be maintained.
The project was referred to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). CDFW responded stating that they agree with the recommendation in the Biological Survey Report requiring tree removal outside the nesting season and added their own recommendation that native plants be used as landscaping and that the use of invasive plant species in landscaping be prohibited. Both recommendations were included in the Conditions of Approval for the permit and will continue to apply to the project.
An Engineering Geologic Soils Report was prepared for the site by A.M. Baird Engineering & Surveying, Inc. in November of 2023 (Attachment 2B). The report notes that slopes on both parcels are in excess of 30% throughout most of the landscape with a flat area near the middle APN 110-251-038. The report also notes that slope instability, liquefaction, and surface rupture due exclusively to faulting or lateral spreading are not considered consequential as to require specific analysis. The report identified that no expansive soils were encountered during their investigation that require specific recommendations, that the soil onsite can support a load of 1,500 pounds per square foot, that one or two-level structures are suitable uses for the property, and that settlement is not anticipated to be detrimental provided considerations are given to the recommendations presented within the report. The recommendations within the report were included as Conditions of Approval for the permit and will continue to apply to the project.
A Septic Disposal Design was prepared for the project by A.M. Baird Engineering & Surveying, Inc. in November of 2023 (Attachment 2C). The site investigation was conducted that found that slopes on both parcels are in excess of 30% throughout most of the landscape with a flat area near the middle of the southernmost parcel (APN: 110-251-038). The southernmost parcel is the most buildable with respect to an onsite wastewater treatment system; however, the merger of both parcels is likely required to meet appropriate septic dispersal field sizing requirements and site spatial conditions. During the site investigation, one trench, ten feet in depth, was excavated adjacent to the flat area near the middle of the parcel. Both specialists on site agreed that the single sampling location would be representative of both the primary and reserve fields, as both fields will be in close proximity to the sampling location. Percolation testing showed that the site is unsuitable for a standard gravity OWTS due to the rapid percolation rate. A non-standard, low-pressure pipe (LPP) dosing system was selected as the appropriate method of wastewater treatment for this project. The non‐standard LPP OWTS allows for a shallow trench depth; therefore, the leach lines can be placed closer together than those in a standard system. The non‐standard LPP OWTS requires the use of a pump chamber, effluent pump and electrical appurtenances to achieve uniform discharge of effluent into a dispersal area. The septic design includes the following: a 1,200-gallon minimum capacity septic tank as required for septic waste storage for the proposed 2-bedroom residence with a loading rate of 300 gallons per day; a 500-gallon minimum capacity pump tank as required for septic waste distribution for the proposed 2-bedromm residence with a loading rate of 300 gallons per day; a force main of SCH 40 PVC, 2.0 inches in diameter and approximately 10 feet in length that extends from the pump tank to the manifold connected to the primary absorption field; and primary and reserve disposal fields, each consisting of two leach lines 41 feet in length placed parallel to contour lines. The project engineer recommends that all surface water drainage from surrounding structures be diverted away from the locations of the septic tank, pump tank, and sewage disposal fields. This is a condition of approval.
OTHER AGENCY INVOLVEMENT:
The original project was referred to responsible agencies and all responding agencies have recommended approval or conditional approval. The modification was referred only to the California Coastal Commission. Given that this is only a change in the design of the residence, no other referral agencies were deemed necessary.
ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The Zoning Administrator could elect not to hear this item and put the decision making in front of the Planning Commission. Any decision to place this matter before the Planning Commission must be made before opening the public hearing on this project; or
2. The Zoning Administrator could elect to add or delete conditions of approval; or
3. The Zoning Administrator could deny approval of the requested permits if unable to make all the required findings. Planning Division staff are confident that the required findings can be made based on the submitted evidence and subject to the recommended conditions of approval. Consequently, planning staff do not recommend further consideration of these alternatives.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft Resolution
A. Conditions of Approval
B. Project Plan Set
2. Applicant’s Evidence in Support of the Required Findings
A. Biological Survey Report
B. Engineering Geologic Soils Report
C. Septic Disposal Design
D. CALFIRE Setback Exception
APPLICANT, OWNER, AGENT AND PLANNER INFORMATION:
Applicant
Aurel Coza
4704 East Euclid Avenue
Phoenix, AZ 85044
Owner
Aurel Coza & Bianca Giurgiu
4704 East Euclid Avenue
Phoenix, AZ 85044
Agent
Blue Hammer Home Design
258 Hemlock Road
Whitethorn, CA 95589
Please contact Michael Kein, Associate Planner, at 707-268-3739 or by email at MKein2@co.humboldt.ca.us, if you have any questions about the scheduled item.