1. Item W16a February 8, 2012 CCC Hearing A-6-OCN-11-080 (Altman) 1823 South Pacific Street City of Oceanside

2. Proposed Project 2

3. 3 View from beach

4. Existing vs. Proposed Street View 4 View from frontage street (S. Pacific Street)

5. Consistency with Visual Resource Protection Policies Proposed development consistent with scale and character of surrounding development Design results in greater articulation and setback from frontage street Upper level addition does not result in substantially larger structure as viewed from beach “…because the height of home is below the maximum allowed, the approved development will not result in a structure that would be out of scale with the surrounding community…” Staff Report, p. 9 5

6. Proposed addition is well within allowable building envelope 6

7. Examples of Surrounding Development 7

8. 8

9. 9

10. Consistency with Stringline 10 All proposed development sited inland of stringline (using “most conservative” survey methods) “Commission staff has reviewed what was submitted by the applicant’s land surveyor, and agrees that, in the absence of traditional survey methods, this is both the most accurate and most conservative way to determine the appropriate setback.” Staff Report, page 11 Staff visited project site and determined that no private or public view blockage will occur

11. All proposed development is located inland of stringline 11 Stringline

12. Consistency with Parking Requirement Proposed addition is less than 500 square feet No additional rooms being proposed; bedroom being removed One-car garage allowable because residence is a legally “existing non-conforming use” Staff finds current available parking supply is greater than demand 12

13. Availability of Parking 13 Looking north along S. Pacific Street

14. Staff Recommendation Staff recommending No Substantial Issue “Thus, the minimal extent and scope of the development supports a finding of no substantial issue, and there are no significant coastal resources affected by the proposed project, also supporting this conclusion. Because the conclusion that this project will not adversely affect coastal resources is based on the very specific facts and context in which this development will be constructed, this appeal does not raise any substantial issues of regional or statewide significance. Finally, the City’s approval of this coastal development permit will not create an adverse precedent for future interpretation of this LCP.” Staff Report p. 13 Project is consistent with character of surrounding development and will not result in adverse impacts to coastal resources Applicant in agreement with recommendation and findings 14