CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT. January 23, 2014 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD. Design Review

Transcription

1 CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT HEARING DATE: TO: CASE: APPLICANT: LOCATION: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: PREPARED BY: January 23, 2014 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Design Review Ernest Velarde (949) Matalon Residence 600 Loretta Drive APN In accordance with State CEQA Guidelines, the project is categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15301, Class 1(e)(1) (Existing Facilities), which allows construction of an addition to an existing structure provided that the addition does not result in an increase of more than 50 percent of the existing floor area Belinda Ann Deines, Assistant Planner (949) REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant requests design review for modifications to a previously approved project in the R-1 zone Modifications include a 673 square-foot living area addition, upper level addition, elevated decks, color and materials, skylights, and landscaping PROJECT SITE DESCRIPTION: The subject property is located at 600 Loretta Drive on the northeast corner of Loretta Drive and Bolsana Drive The site is comprised of a 6,987 squarefoot parcel in the R-1 (Residential Low Density) zone with a General Plan designation of "Village Low Density" The topography of the lot is relatively steep with an upward slope of 26 percent The subject site is bound by surrounding properties as follows: Zone General Plan Existing Use North R-1 VLD Single-family residence East R-1 VLD Vacant Lot South R-1 VLD Single-family residence West R-1 VLD Single-family residences Project Site R-1 VLD Single-family residence Building permits indicate that the existing single-family dwelling and attached two-car garage was built in 2000 under approval of Design Review (4/13/2000) The existing two- story house is approximately 2,902 square feet with living, kitchen and dining areas on the upper level as well as three bedrooms on the lower level

2 DR Loretta Drive January 23, 2014 Page 2 of 5 STAFF REVIEW BACKGROUND: Prior to zoning plan check, staff met with the applicant on January 25, 2013 for a pre-application site meeting to discuss the upper level addition The evaluation can be found in attachment to this report The applicant indicated that he has contacted some of the neighbors that may be directly impacted by the proposed project Staff recommended that the applicant should install preliminary staking early on in the design process in an effort to work with the neighbors and minimize potential impacts to existing cross views STAFF ANALYSIS: The applicant seeks a 673 square-foot addition to the existing house The 611 square-foot upper level addition of a new master bedroom and bathroom is proposed above the second and third bedrooms, replacing flat roof areas The lower level addition consists of expanding the entry foyer and interior staircase, eliminating the angled front design The applicant proposes to add approximately 181 square feet of elevated deck area Prior to completion of this report, staff observed the addition as represented by the current staking Property Development Standards and Zoning Ordinance Consistency: The proposed scope of work is in compliance with all setback, height and lot coverage requirements of the R-1 zone Project summary tables can be found in attachment to this report Property development standards specific to each zone are intended to provide the City with maximum flexibility and discretion in the decision making process Design Review Criteria: Pursuant to Section (H) of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code ("LBMC"), physical improvements and site developments subject to design review shall be designed to best satisfy the intent and purpose of design review In reviewing the applicant's request for Design Review , staff has conducted a thorough analysis of the proposed project and associated provisions set forth below: Access: Conflicts between vehicles, pedestrians and other modes of transportation should be minimized by specifically providing for each applicable mode of transportation Handicapped access shall be provided as required by applicable statutes The applicant proposes to redesign the exterior entry staircase with new on-grade stairs from Bolsana Drive The property maintains an existing two-car garage that meets the minimum parking requirements for a single-family residence under 3,600 square feet in floor area Design Articulation: Within the allowable building envelope, the appearance of building and retaining wall mass should be minimized Articulation techniques including, but not limited to, separation, offsets, terracing and reducing the size of any one element in the structure may be used to reduce the appearance of mass The upper level addition involves new construction where there is existing flat roof area The proposed addition appears articulated with angled wall planes and cantilevered additions toward the rear The applicant proposes a 9'-0" plate height for the new upper level bedroom with a sloped roof with the new ridge approximately 4'-8" lower than the existing maximum ridge Existing residential development in the immediate area should serve as a guide for appropriate mass and scale

3 DR Loretta Drive January 23, 2014 Page 3 of 5 Design Integrity Consistency with the applicant's chosen style of architecture should be achieved by the use of appropriate materials and details Remodels should be harmonious with the remaining existing architecture The applicant proposes to match the proposed addition with the existing contemporary architectural features However, the previously approved color and materials sample board will be updated to a sand-colored stucco and light tan limestone tile The applicant proposes that the roofing material will be a light gray crushed rock Environmental Context Development should preserve and, where possible, enhance the city's scenic natural setting Natural features, such as existing heritage trees, rock outcropping, ridgelines and significant watercourses should be protected Existing terrain should be utilized in the design and grading should be minimized No environmental constraints are associated with the site Proposed grading occurs inside of the building footprint and results in approximately 289 cubic yards of cut The applicant proposes 462 percent of the total lot area as impervious surfaces General Plan Compliance The development shall comply with all applicable policies of the general plan, including all of its elements, applicable specific plans, and the certified local coastal program The proposed single-family residence is in compliance with the current General Plan Land Use Designation for the subject site under Village Low Density Landscaping Landscaping shall be incorporated as an integrated part of the structure's design and relate harmoniously to neighborhood and community landscaping themes View equity shall be an important consideration in the landscape design The relevant landscaping guidelines contained in the city's "Landscape and Scenic Highways Resource Document" should be incorporated, as appropriate, in the design and planned maintenance of proposed landscaping The applicant provided an as-planted landscaping plan because the scope of work involves an upper level addition Generally, the existing landscaping does not conform to the previously approved landscape plan as shown in attachment to this report Groundcover and shrubs along the front and corner have been replaced with lawn area The subject site is located within the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone and all target species, including pampas grass, should be removed Lighting and Glare Adequate lighting for individual and public safety shall be provided in a manner which does not significantly impact neighboring properties Reflective materials and appurtenances that cause glare or a negative visual impact (eg, skylights, white rock roofs, high-gloss ceramic tile roofs, reflective glass, etc) should be avoided or mitigated to a level of insignificance in those locations where those surfaces are visible from neighboring properties The applicant proposes a new skylight over the master bathroom and two new solar tube skylights in the master bedroom hallway

4 DR Loretta Drive January 23, 2014 Page 4 of 5 Neighborhood Compatibility Development shall be compatible with the existing development in the neighborhood and respect neighborhood character Neighborhood character is the sum of the qualities that distinguish areas within the city, including historical patterns of development (eg, structural heights, mass, scale or size), village atmosphere, landscaping themes and architectural styles The proposed upper level expansion above the existing bedrooms appears in keeping with the architectural style and pattern of development along Loretta Drive and the immediate area Overall program for the site includes 3,564 square feet of living area, 752 square feet of garage area and 608 square feet of elevated deck area Privacy The placement of activity areas (eg, decks, picture windows and ceremonial or entertainment rooms) in locations that would result in a substantial invasion of privacy of neighboring properties should be minimized The design includes new windows and doors that should be strategically placed along the front and side elevations to mitigate any privacy issues Staff has not received any correspondence from neighbors with privacy concerns View Equity: The development, including its landscaping, shall be designed to protect existing views from neighboring properties without denying the subject property the reasonable opportunity to develop as described and illustrated in the city's "Design Guidelines" The "Design Guidelines" are intended to balance preservation of views with the right to develop property Staff received s from the neighbor at 740 Bolsana Drive, immediately to the north of the subject site The neighbor expressed that the proposed upper level addition will obstruct views from the rear yard patio The applicant contends that the neighbor's view from the patio is toward the neighbor's palm trees, roofing and ocean horizon The applicant suggested changing the roof to a terracotta color to reduce glare Design Review Guidelines: None Requested Variances: None Nonconforming Conditions: None COMMUNITY INTEREST: Staff has received two letters from neighbors expressing support of the project following the applicant's neighborhood meeting held on September 28, 2013 The neighbor located at 740 Bolsana Drive has view equity concerns and opposes the proposed upper level addition CONCLUSION: The applicant proposes additions to the existing two-story single-family dwelling for a total of 3,564 square feet of gross floor area The 611 square-foot upper level addition involves creating a new master bedroom and bathroom The applicant submitted an asplanted landscape plan, which shows significant changes from the previously approved landscape plan

5 ATTACHMENTS: Project Summary Tables Prior DRB Minutes 4/13/2000 Approved Landscape Plan 4/13/2000 Pre-Application Site Meeting Evaluation 1/25/2013 Color and Material Sample Board Vicinity Map Aerial Photo DR Loretta Drive January 23, 2014 Page 5 of 5

6 PRC 1CT SUMMARY TABLES _ ZONING STANDARDS DESCRIPTION, REQUIREDIALLOWED, EXISTING PROPOSED USE SFD - SFD SFD ' CONFORMS (Yes/No) ZONE R-1 K- 1 g- 1 yo* LOT AREA 40) , "la12-, i 49,111- '-r-el LOT WIDTH (AVG) icz t 65,* I to9, 1, *0-4 LOT DEPTH (AVG) / ; I, le*,5 ' `0-9 LOT SLOPE (%) 94 A,' 4 `v/0 ulec, MAX BUILDING HEIGHT 1 V F,E5Oge - NeAsgsk 1 4-1A30V-Ft/Ntk f ,1/4006 Mk -1P MAX HEIGHT FROM GRADE SP I 94,,7' 1-10:15 1 SETBACKS: Front Yard 7--a i 0%9, r 2-ev,1 Rear Yard V'-' Side Yards A I,5,I 1 _1 -ipt9 i,' ro,s i, S,' LOT COVERAGE (BSC) _,"71:1 1,0= ;4606, la - )1 91 D _?--,341 t LANDSCAPE OPEN SPACE 22- #15 % 0 91(F 0 0 9tril '44-3,1t: i 'f PROJECT DATA DESCRIPTION EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL LIVING AREA: Lower Floor 11,e', m 1 ureutroor If 610,M ril 1 - r TOTAL 1-101eo I/ I 02-M711: '0 1 56_6 r}) GARAGE 7 2 tj 1 C? r --,--' tp,deck AREA 42-7 e'? tp ,:l 6079iti t, I 1 SITE WORK Outside of Structural Footprint Inside Structural Footprint Total 1- e)ci 1179' 2 M '1'23 GRADING Cut Fill , Net Export -19- '4,1 41 '02 2) 1,61,p93 I IMPERVIOUS SURFACES Square Footage Existing Proposed % of Lot Area Existing Proposed Structure 7;141 _ AS41, tip 2-9 % $34%, Hardscape ((ncluding driveway) 902, t I 67b b 12-1 t/p 1*-,4 "k TOTAL 3)2-12 I ts,i 2'227 b 41,0o_ 46,2_% 1

7 3 DESIGN REVIEW : 283 6,,,LEXANDER ROAD APN APPROVED The applicant requests Design Review Board approval for a two-year extension of time In 1998, design review approval was given for additions to a single-family dwelling This is the first request Mr Simon made a motion, seconded by Mr McGraw, to approve a two-year extension of time for Design Review at 2836 Alexander Road The motion carried unanimously DESIGN REVIEW ; 370 GLENNEYRE STREET, ,-12, APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS The applicant requests Design Review Board approval for signage Testimony in Support: Joyce Sehi, Quality Project Coordinating, said they are requesting signage for the Sorrent Grill They are proposing a 7-foot sign with 17-inch high letters for "Sorrento" and 13 inches for "Grill" The letter will be made of aluminum and painted a rust color Board Comments: The Board would agree to the sign being reduced from 7 feet to 5 feet and the lettering be no highe than 12 inches for "Sorrento" and 10 inches for "Grill" Mr Zur Schmiede made a motion, seconded by Mr Simon, to approve Design Review at 370 Glenneyre Stree on the condition that the sign be reduced from 7 feet to 5 feet and the letters on "Sorrento" be no higher than 12 inche and the letters on "Grill" be no higher than 10" The motion carried unanimously DESIGN REVIEW : 600 LORETTA DRIVE, APN APPROVED The applicant requests Design Review Board approval to construct a new 2,854 square-foot single-family residenc in the R-1 zone Design review is required for the new structure, elevated decks, skylights, chimney height and landscape Testimony in Support: Sam Anvari, architect, described the project Brent Enright, spoke in support of the project Both! Comments: The Board had no comments and was in support of the project Mr Zur Schmiede made a motion, seconded by Mr Simon, to approve Design Review at 600 Loretta Drive The Motion carried unanimously 6 DESIGN REVIEW : CEANOTHUS DRIVE APN CONTINUED TO THE MEETIN OF MAY 4, 200 The applicant requests Design Review Board approval to construct a 375 square-foot addition to an existing singlefamily residence in the R-1 zone Design review is required for additions more than 15 feet in height, elevated deck and retaining walls Testimony in Support: Jeff Eastman, representing the owner, described the project Testimony in Opposition: Jim Burnes, Ceanothus, is concerned with the new addition on the south side of th project, especially the elevated deck The upper deck extends into his northcoast view corridor, which is an importan secondary view for him He wants to be sure there are no new or extended chimneys and he would like the project lowered He is concerned about the setbacks on the south side of the property because the lot line does not seem accurate when compared to a survey he had done Mr Burnes and the applicant signed this survey Ron Lee; Ceanothus, said his six-foot, utility easement runs along the applicant's property and the applicant ha planted trees, which has caused great damage to his utilities The applicant agreed to remove the trees and once thes trees are removed, Mr Lee will have a view of the applicant's roof A portion of the roof has a glass section simila Board of Adjustment/Design Review Board Minutes -4- April 13, 2000

8 Nirpfkrtim= ru411;v: IrrI>C-X-c iciql:nni MY/ 1,41=1AL1N Jr 'h4-j4 ;14:41 PrTtatIVALA rric,ti VT' r-1-7t Al MID( 1r-1414corI4G rsztram 4-4 WM WNW, MIX) CNCE711 1' --VCr4\ CY11f Jar COThW, 4-:,3&efilm ru Q42valtittlCPCKY VC-111P1)14tiMUM t CV= irbe mot-17_41,o 4F24 Ise-WM T( Milli llaalti q6own Or 14 VeCrg*-146, 14)C4V-- CA111 al't WV/ 1K1144A PPFXII \ t--;to fsz,bosa4 raniv-) 0 "itil-liu simplcrl P 4144 FtW are,x 141 I tr,,,r_ f1 41(45w tufi f/111 grzsz Kairr, 441 ervi _wiz; 1+1 (20%,"" - CrItX )111r 341 W sl-km crftime 'pri 7-141A3211:17, V--1rth<VDN: rz ;14 4 cv:ilti1 trts, orukrti 7n4rict, LaureL -ALoo Lq-flail- IrJ:rft-Nritl-r,1" 1tI :X* 2ac a Kr:WOW e'irkr:( WIPON-RiLfIfS I,7r,473:2= Irrztr_4 ItE, cgi4e0', PAW:: 1 ;;,; U rikralq JTrM 10 cc r-uu-y kw-j*1s% arimen:pta MCCPrilaL,FS=AFtt wa4-p^a r044,9 02o2-1, 04q 44,5E2A0 00/70 07 ADJ'JSTMENT NORTH SCALE I/O rcr mc Carroll residence landscape design 600 loretto dr loguna beach /ono ruxicko 530 CIIIIS11 I 1 11 d1copeorchitoc I go beech 9u V121 alp

9 City of Laguna Beach Community Development Department Pre-Application Site Development Review Meeting Evaluation Evaluation Meeting Number: Date: January 25, 2013 Prepared by: Applicant: Site Address: Belinda Ann Deines, Assistant Planner Ernest Velarde, Architect 600 Loretta Drive Assessor Parcel Number: Zone/Specific Plan: R-1 (Residential Low Density) Background: City records show that the existing single-family dwelling and two-car garage was constructed in December 2000 under Design Review (4/13/00) The applicant intends to construct an upper level addition above a lower level area with a flat roof facing Loretta Drive A site meeting is required for upper level additions and it appears that there are no immediate privacy or view equity issues at this time The applicant will be required to stake the proposed improvements and conduct a neighborhood meeting prior to the Design Review Board hearing Design review will be required for modifications to a previously approved project, upper level additions, elevated decks, skylights and landscaping Development Standards (to be verified during zoning plan check with survey): Front Setback 20 feet Rear Setback 20 feet Side Setback 134 feet combined Lot Slope in Percent staff calculates at greater than 20% to be verified with survey; Height Maximum 15 feet above rear lot line Maximum 30 feet measured from lowest finished floor, finished or natural grade, whichever is more restrictive [LBMC (D)(1)] Building Site Coverage 373% (2,606 square feet) Additional Building Setback Pursuant to Section (D) Parking Two covered onsite parking spaces; if gross floor area exceeds 3,600 SF, then an additional onsite parking space must be provided Landscape Open Space 245% (1,572 square feet) Neighborhood Landscape Area 10 (Portafina) in the Landscape and Scenic Highways Resource Document Des in Review Criteria LBMC (ffi 1 Access: Conflicts between vehicles, pedestrians and other modes of transportation should be minimized by specifically providing for each applicable mode of transportation The subject site maintains an existing two-car garage that meets the minimum parking requirements for a single-family dwelling less than 3,600 square feet in gross floor area No other access improvements required 2 Design Articulation: Within the allowable envelope, the appearance of building and retaining wall mass should be minimized Articulation techniques including, but not limited to, separation, offsets, Pre-Application Site Development Review Meeting [600 Loretta Drive] January 25, 2013 Page 1 of 4

10 terracing and reducing the size of any one element in the structure may be used to reduce the appearance of mass Staff encourages the applicant to incorporate elements that provide appropriate building mass, scale and form in the proposed design 3 Design Integrity: Consistency with the applicant's chosen style of architecture should be achieved by the use of appropriate materials and details Remodels should be harmonious with the remaining existing architecture The proposed upper level addition will be designed in such a way that matches in style and complements the existing contemporary structure The applicant also intends to expand the entry area, which will modify the existing angular feature to a curved wall facing Bolsana Drive The intent is to create a more functional entry and staircase No alternative exterior colors or materials are proposed at this time 4 Environmental Context: Development should preserve and where possible, enhance the city's scenic natural setting Natural features, such as existing heritage trees, rock out-cropping, ridgelines and significant watercourses should be protected Existing terrain should be utilized in the design and grading should be minimized No environmental constraints are associated with the site The Design Review Board will review the placement of the proposed structure and how it relates to existing natural site features If the applicant plans for grading outside the building footprint, any grading greater than 20 cubic yards will be subject to design review Grading should be minimal outside the building footprint, especially in terms of cut and fill 5 General Plan Compliance: The development shall comply with all applicable policies of the general plan, including all of its elements, applicable specific plans, and the local coastal program The proposed single family dwelling complies with the Village Low Density Land Use Designation 6 Historic Preservation: Destruction or alteration to properties with historic significance, as identified in the city's Historic Resources Inventory or Historic Register, should be avoided whenever possible Special preservation consideration should be given to any structures over forty-five years old 7 Landscaping: Landscaping shall be incorporated as an integrated part of the structure's design and relate harmoniously to neighborhood and community landscaping themes View equity shall be an important consideration in the landscape design The relevant landscaping guidelines contained in the city's Landscape and Scenic Highways Resource Document should be incorporated, as appropriate, in the design and planned maintenance of proposed landscaping The project consists of an upper level addition, which requires submittal of a landscape plan Staff observed that the existing landscaping at the site does not reflect the approved landscaping plan If any modifications to the previously approved landscape plan are proposed, please indicate new versus existing on the plan The applicant should consider mitigation of view corridors by lacing existing trees or hedge height limitations Staff encourages the applicant to consider minimizing the visual impact of a retaining wall Landscaping can be used to minimize the visual impacts of walls and structures Impervious surface areas should not exceed percent of total lot area Pre-Application Site Development Review Meeting [600 Loretta Drive] January 25, 2013 Page 2 of 4

11 8 Lighting and Glare: Adequate lighting for individual and public safety shall be provided in a manner which does not significantly impact neighboring properties Reflective materials and appurtenances that cause glare or a negative visual impact (eg, skylights, white rock roofs, highgloss ceramic tile roofs, reflective glass, etc) should be avoided or mitigated to a level of insignificance in those locations where those surfaces are visible from neighboring properties Any proposed landscape lighting should be shown on the landscape plan The applicant has been advised that outdoor lighting should be minimized and strategically placed The applicant must also take into consideration the placement of skylights in relationship to neighboring activity areas and upper levels Skylights are subject to Design Review and automatic night shades may be required 9 Neighborhood Compatibility:, Development shall be compatible with the existing development in the neighborhood and respect neighborhood character Neighborhood character is the sum of the qualities that distinguish areas within the city, including historical patterns of development (eg, structural heights, mass, scale or size), village atmosphere, landscaping themes and architectural styles The applicant should research and evaluate the characteristics of the neighborhood in terms of building site coverage, square footage, number of stories and parking egress The Design Review Board reviews total program including, but not limited to, living, garage, deck, mechanical and storage areas Applicant must consider the amount of program requested in relationship to neighborhood compatibility 10 Privacy: The placement of activity areas, (eg, decks, picture windows and ceremonial or entertainment rooms) in locations that would result in a substantial invasion of privacy of neighboring properties should be minimized Staff mentioned that the applicant should keep in mind the placement of windows in relationship to neighboring properties Staff recommends for the applicant to consider the floor plan of the subject property and adjacent residences It is recommended that the applicant evaluate the site and assess the impact the upper level addition might have on views, privacy, light and shade 11 Sustainability: New development should consider architecture and building practices which minimize environmental impacts and enhance energy efficiency by: (1) reducing energy needs of buildings by proper site and structural design; (2) increasing the building's ability to capture or generate energy; (3) using low-impact, sustainable and recycled building materials; (4) using the latest Best Management Practices regarding waste and water management; and (5) reducing site emissions Staff encourages the applicant to utilize sustainable site measures and green building code requirements, which may include: Water management both indoor and outdoor Smart irrigation Gray water systems Permeable concrete Tankless water heaters Dual flush toilets Energy management Window glazing and design Pre-Application Site Development Review Meeting January 25, 2013 Controlled lighting design Displacement ventilation systems Materials and resources management Local products (reduces transportation waste) Natural, renewable materials Recycled materials Reduced waste [600 Loretta Drive] Page 3 of 4

12 Indoor environment Cross-ventilation Daylighting Low/no VOCs Thermal controls Innovative design Implementing new ideas, products 12 Swimming Pools, Spas, Water Features and Mechanical Equipment: Swimming pools, spas and water features shall be located, designed and constructed where: (a) geology conditions allow; (b) noise produced by circulatory mechanical pumps and equipment is mitigated; and (c) any associated fencing or other site development is compatible with neighboring properties The applicant should mitigate the neighborhood impact of any mechanical equipment such as air conditioning units No pool, spa or water features are proposed at the site 13 View Equity: The development, including landscaping, shall be designed to protect existing views from neighboring properties without denying the subject property the reasonable opportunity to develop as described and illustrated in the ctty's "design guidelines" The "design guidelines" are intended to balance preservation of views with the right to develop property The applicant indicated that he has contacted some of the neighbors that may be directly impacted by the proposed project The applicant should install preliminary staking early on in the design process in an effort to work with neighbors and minimize potential impacts to existing cross views Staking also helps to identify building mass and scale of the proposed project The City requires each applicant to take reasonable steps to contact neighbors within 300 feet of the proposed project prior to scheduling a Design Review Board hearing Early, informal communication with neighbors, preferably prior to decision of a fmal design, often resolves potential conflicts so that the formal design review process can be expedited A neighborhood meeting is required before the project can be scheduled for Design Review Potential Variance Issues: None Nonconforming Site Conditions: None Special Processing Requirements: The applicant must hold a neighborhood meeting prior to scheduling for design review Following zoning plan check, Staff Assisted Design Review is required for modifications to a previously approved project, upper level additions, elevated decks, skylights and landscaping This preliminary evaluation is given to applicants and their design advisors to utilize as early as possible in the design stage of a contemplated project so that the ensuing design is more likely to meet the Design Review Board's approval before substantial time and resources have been expended However, this preliminary evaluation provided by staff does not bind the Design Review Board in any manner in its review of or decisions on an application Should you have any questions or comments regarding this evaluation, contact: Belinda Ann Deines, Assistant Planner bdeineslagunabeachcitvnet (949) Pre-Application Site Development Review Meeting [600 Loretta Drive] January 25, 2013 Page 4 of 4

13 City of Laguna Beach Geographic Information System (GIS) Parcel Information Report 01/03/2014 Site Street Address Assessor Parcel No (APN) Parcel ID No (PIN) Property Owner(s) Parcel Area (sq ft) Zone(s) Specific Plan General Plan Land Use Designation(s) Building Site Status Historic Resources Inventory Rating (C, K, E, X) Historic Register Designation Date Environmental Constraints On-Site Turnaround Required Special Subdivision Map Building Setbacks Special Street Plan Requirements Special Subdivision Map Height Standards Recommended Landscaping and Setbacks FEMA Flood Zone Flood Plain Map Effective Date FEMA Flood Zone Map Panel Private Sewer Lateral Corrective Notice Date Private Sewer Lateral Compliance Clearance Date 600 Loretta Dr Victor Matalon 6987 R1 None VLD Yes VHFHSZ No None None None None X 12/03/ C0419J

14 A Glass Skylight t-a&t1-*-1 Ivr 1 P-Jem 111-1Thiv 124) H_47 la-,,e-le, fri-oririv-4-1 L-wiHT eol-folz 10/Fine TJJ ca -4,46012 rleat FIN1H " '" CA014",'L/ t W111120W aoar_f "I'Id're-17 tmea pc,km E0 - WHfl relfr':rfr*i,a11 reat7p,le, getiopst 4 frq7p IT [ar-i 6o 47 La 171z1v) bec-ie-5 LirSer,o4 7/1,Li

15 0 ', \ 717 Balboa Av pook, i I i Loretta Drive - Vicinity Map e750 Bolsana Dr r 733 Bolsana Dr 4 _ - %I 725 Bolsana Dr 1-4,,,,, Bolsana-Dr irill, 1 ak 713 Bolsana Dr1 %, \ ' \ 4 ' \ 705 Bolsana Dr Balbea Av ' " 699 Bolsana Dr' t L;, ',let - - i ' - :i,, A t 1 "! -t- ''e '748 Bolsana Dr / i! 0 - ii to 1'14 t Open Space Preserve Areas 740 Bolsana Dr 100 Year Flood Plain ev - Seismic Hazard Liquifaction Ar bts 1 i \_- 600 Loretta Dr 1-4: rm 742 Barracuda VVy,,- -- al C=C:tRif ) 1, - Legend C City Limits 4i, - - A (- 41 Specific Plan Areas Parcels - Seismic Hazard Landslide Are, Drainage Course 25ft Buffer Significant Drainage Course C - l j Ridgelines Loretta Dr Very High Value Habitat 808 Loretta Dr ' - High Value Habitat Color Aerial Orthophotos 808 Loretta Dr El Red Band _l Vr ' El Green Band_2 J t% 610 Loretta Dr, r,, 610 Loretta Dr : 818 Loretta Dr 6111Loretta Dr Loretta Dr 1, Loretta Dr 824 Loretta Dr 1: 757, 709 Balboa Av 689 Bolsana Dr 624 Loretto Dr \ - \ ' Feet Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable City of Laguna Beach 4 s ' Notes Blue Band_ Building Footprints Enter Map Description

16