Opening/Flag Salute/Roll Call. Approval of Minutes- August 9, 2016; August 23, 2016

Transcription

1 Planning Commission Agenda City Hall th Street Tuesday, September 13, 2016 at 7:00 PM We May Disagree, But We Will Be Respectful of One Another. All Comments Will Be Directed to the Issue at Hand, and Addressed to the Commission. Personal Attacks are Unacceptable Opening/Flag Salute/Roll Call Approval of Minutes- August 9, 2016; August 23, 2016 Oral Comments from the Public Members of the public may be heard on any item of interest not on the Agenda. Speakers addressing the Commission will be limited to 3 minutes per speaker. Be advised that, by law, the Commission is not able to deliberate or take action on issues presented during Oral Comments. Business 1. Consideration of a Lot Line Adjustment Between Two Adjoining Parcels. Applicant: Carmen Smith. Agent: Lisa Shikany. APN: and Project Site: 3930 Loop Road. Zoning: Residential Estates (RE 20). 2. Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit for a 3200 Square Foot Detached Garage with a Height of 18 Feet. Application: Ross and Julie Rundell. APN: Location: 2220 Kenmar Road. Zoning: Residential Single Family (R-1-6) Staff/Commission Communications Trailer Park Village State Code Compliance Update. Copies of maps and other information for the agenda items are available for review at the Community Development Dept. at City Hall, th Street, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Members of the public are invited to come to the meeting and comment on any item under discussion. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Building Department at (707) Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting (28 CFR ADA Title II). If you are not satisfied with a decision of the Planning Commission, you may appeal the decision to the City Council. If you appeal a decision, the appeal must be filed with the City Clerk within 15 days of the Planning Commission s decision. 1

2 NOTICE REGARDING CHALLENGES TO DECISIONS Pursuant to all applicable laws and regulations, including without limitation, Calif. Gov. Code Section and or Calif. Public Resources Code Sec , if you wish to challenge in court any of the above decisions (regarding planning, zoning and/or environmental decisions), you may be limited to raising only those issues raised at the public hearing(s) described in this notice/agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk prior to this public hearing. 2

3 Minutes of the Fortuna Planning Commission Tuesday, August 9, :00p.m. Fortuna City Hall Note: The following record contains motions and actions of the Fortuna Planning Commission. An audio library of the meeting proceedings is on file at Fortuna City Hall. I. CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Kravitz called the meeting to order at 7:00PM. FLAG SALUTE: Chairman Kravitz led the flag salute. ROLL CALL: Planning Commission Commissioner Davis Commissioner Schwartz Commissioner Meaney Commissioner Mobley Commissioner Morrison Vice Chairman Bywater Chairman Kravitz Staff Present City Manager Regan Candelario Deputy Director Community Development Liz Shorey Sr. Administrative Assistant Jennifer Ourique Commissioners Absent: II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Motion to approve July 26, 2016 minutes by Commissioner Schwartz; seconded by Commissioner Mobley. AYES: Davis, Schwartz, Meaney, Mobley, Morrison, Bywater, Kravitz NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Motion Carried III. ORAL COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC: Donna Matthews gave an update on the trailer village on Fortuna Boulevard. The state inspector stated that progress has been made. She thanked the Commission for calling the state and addressing the ongoing issues of the park. She stated that the buildings on the property were not inspected as they fall under county or city jurisdiction. The state inspector did notify residents of violations, but the provided letter will be in English only which may require some outreach to ensure non- English speaking residents understand the notice. The issue of the ongoing crime continues and the current eviction time is 120 days. Lastly, those that had spoken 3

4 out before against the trailer village fear retaliation and are pressured to not speak publically about the issue. IV. BUSINESS: 1. Informational Item: Presentation of McLean Foundation s Proposed Community Center. Kirk Cohune, project manager representing Greenway Partners presented phase one of the proposed McLean Community Center. The center will be located on three parcels with 400 parking spaces, multiple building centers, soccer fields, and trails. With the Open Door Community Health Center project and the Community Center timeline the McLean foundation is still working with the numbers and looking for partners to approve the plans and move forward with the project. If the resources can be obtained they hope to bring the project to staff in October. 2. Design Review of a 16-foot by 56-foot Mural on the West Side of Ray s Food Place. Applicant: Karen DelAngelo APN: Project Site: 2009 Main Street Zoning: Commercial Thoroughfare (C-T) Commissioner Meaney made a motion to approve a, Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Fortuna Approving Design Review for the Postcard Mural on the Ray s Food Place Building; second by Commissioner Mobley. AYES: Davis, Schwartz, Meaney, Mobley, Morrison, Bywater, Kravitz NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Motion Carried 4

5 3. A Public Hearing to Consider a Conditional Use Permit for a Fast Food Drive- Thru Restaurant. Applicant: Anand Patel APN: & 018 Project Location: 898 Main Street Zoning: Retail Commercial (R-C) Commissioner Mobley asked Staff about the hours of operation. Hours of operation weekdays would be 10am to 10pm and Friday and Saturday would extend evening hours to 11pm. Chairman Kravitz addressed the City Manager and Deputy Director of Community Development. He asked if the drive-thru design was compatible with what they envisioned for downtown. The Deputy Director stated that in reference to the façade the developers have already altered the plan to maintain the historic sloped roof and the Little Caesars signage and colors will comply with the Design Review Guidelines and General Plan architecture standards. Commissioner Morrison stated there will be a large impact from the right hand turn to Main Street. Bywater asked Staff if they had a solution or options available to the city to resolve traffic on 9th and Main Street. Commissioner Davis agreed with Kravitz in questioning if the building works with creating foot traffic in the downtown area and asked the applicant if they could incorporate some outdoor seating and bike racks. Applicant Anand Patel addressed queuing and design questions. He stated that the orange in the color scheme would be limited to the signage and building trim. Little Caesars understands downtown needs and they would be willing to work with staff to create a design that would work with the downtown area. Patel also stated that they had taken measurements for outdoor seating to be located near the accessible parking area and would be interested in incorporating it and bike racks in the design. The applicant explained the Hot-n-Ready Little Caesars business concept. They will always have certain items prepared and ready for sale and have the full menu available during the peak period 4pm-8pm. They will use business projections to reduce bottlenecks and item shortages. Customers can order through the drive-thru, walk in, or phone in the order. During public comments several members from the public shared their concerns. Concerns included decrease in parking, increase traffic for 9th and Main Street, noise, vehicle emissions, evening glare, and other issues that would directly impact the residential neighborhood behind the proposed business. Commissioner Meaney stated that it is a great idea for the City, but not a great location. Commissioner Mobley asked about the size of the trash enclosure and truck deliveries. The applicant stated that it was in their control when the deliveries would arrive and that they could request a time to not interfere with the residents. Kravitz stated the hours of delivery could be added to the conditions of approval. 5

6 Commissioner Davis stated that he was not ready to say yes to the project, but he also did not want to say no because of lack of information on traffic. He would like to know more about the traffic impact and what improvements need to be made before moving forward with a vote. Chairman Kravitz agreed and stated that he did not see concrete solutions to traffic and could not at that time support the project. Commissioner Schwartz made a motion to postpone the vote on the conditional use permit until a traffic study is completed and options to mitigate traffic and parking issues are identified; seconded by Commissioner Morrison. AYES: Davis, Schwartz, Meaney, Mobley, Morrison, Bywater, Kravitz NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Motion Carried V. STAFF COMMUNICATION: Design Review workshop scheduled for Tuesday, August 23 rd at 6pm. Chairman Kravitz stated that he spoke to the inspector sent to the trailer village. He commented that the conditions had improved since posting the notices one month ago. Best case scenario is that the manager and some tenants will have to address the violations and improve the conditions. If this can be done than the license to operate will not be revoked and no residents will be displaced. VI. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 8:47 PM. 6

7 Minutes of the Fortuna Planning Commission Design Review Workshop Tuesday, August 23, :00p.m. Fortuna City Hall Note: The following record contains motions and actions of the Fortuna Planning Commission. An audio library of the meeting proceedings is on file at Fortuna City Hall. I. CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Kravitz called the meeting to order at 6PM. FLAG SALUTE: Chairman Kravitz led the flag salute. ROLL CALL: Planning Commission Staff Present Commissioner Davis Commissioner Schwartz Commissioner Meaney Commissioner Mobley Commissioner Morrison Vice Chairman Bywater Chairman Kravitz Deputy Director Community Development Liz Shorey Sr. Administrative Assistant Jennifer Ourique Commissioners Absent: III. ORAL COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC: None were made. IV. BUSINESS: 1. Workshop Discussion of Design Review Guidelines and Provide Direction to Staff. Commissioner Davis wanted to go through the draft guidelines and make sure there are no new requirements. On page 11, Neighborhood he would like to have the breakdown of neighborhood zones i.e. Downtown, Rohnerville, Riverwalk, Mill District, and Fortuna Boulevard with descriptions and pictures of the characteristics of each zone. Commissioners agreed to change language from acceptable and not acceptable to encouraged and not encouraged. 7

8 Commissioners directed staff to reference municipal code and/or general plan sections for items such as banners, walls and fencing, and dumpster enclosures. On the section pertaining to fencing, they would like to remove prohibit from chain link fences to encourage slates and decorative features. On page 55 the section on drainage staff should reference the LID manual and incorporate pictures and examples of LIDs. Overall the commission would like to see more local pictures of projects in the city for a better representation Fortuna development. During public comment Dennis Wendt requested more local pictures incorporated in the Design Review Guidelines as Fortuna and Rocklin are very different in population and what developers can afford. Chairman Kravitz would like staff to clarify the process of the Planning Commission updating the guidelines. Commissioner Davis would like to ensure the Planning Commission creates findings to present to the City Council when a project is denied to explain the reasoning for the denial. Commissioner Meaney suggested the City Council is presented with how far into the Design Review process the project has gone through prior to the denial. V. STAFF COMMUNICATION: Commissioner Meaney would like to request that the Trailer Park issue is kept on the agenda. Chairman Kravitz requested staff to have the City Attorney or City Manager request the findings document from the state agency through the Freedom of Information Act and respond to that effort in the next meeting. The next design review workshop will be September 27 th at 6PM prior to the regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting. VI. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 7:10 PM. 8

9 DATE: September 13, 2016 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TO: FROM: THRU: SUBJECT: Planning Commission Liz Shorey, Deputy Director of Community Development Regan M. Candelario, City Manager Smith Lot Line Adjustment PROJECT INFORMATION: Description: Request for approval of a lot line adjustment that proposes to relocate the side property line between two adjoining residential parcels. Applicant: Carmen Smith Agent: Lisa Shikany APN: and -005 Project Site: 3930 Loop Road Zoning: Residential Estates (RE 20) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the lot line adjustment with conditions. The applicant is proposing to relocate a property boundary between two adjoining residential parcels. The property line to be moved is the common side boundary between APN , 7 acres in size and developed with a single family residence, and , a 4-acre vacant parcel. The existing common property line, running east/west, will be adjusted to a north/south orientation. The resulting parcels will be a residential parcel (Parcel A), one to 1.5 acres in size, and a vacant parcel (Parcel B), approximately ten acres in size, as shown on the attached site plan. The purpose of the lot line adjustment is to increase the size and improve the buildable area of the vacant parcel for future development of a single family home. Two adjustment options are proposed, both shown on the site plan. Option A would give Parcel A one acre of land, while Option B would give Parcel A an additional 0.5 acre (1.5 acres total). The reason for the two options is that the applicant and a potential buyer each have a different interest in the final boundaries; the result of the sale will determine which option will get recorded. The project is located east of Rohnerville Road on the south side of Loop Road. The area is characterized by low density, rural residential development. The General Plan land use designation is Residential Very Low (RVL), and the zoning district is Residential Estates (RE- 20). Site characteristics consist of Jameson Creek along the north boundary, open grassland in the central area, and slopes in the south rising to the forested area along the neighboring Forest Hills gated community. Future development of Parcel B would consist of a single family residence consistent with the RE-20 zoning, most likely to be located in the open grassy area; the 9

10 lot line adjustment will expand the potential building area that exists on to include the grassy area on as well. City water is provided through an existing water easement from the Forest Hills development to the south (Parcel I) and an existing spring easement. Under Option A, a city water easement for Parcel A would be required, and easement for spring would be required if rights to the spring are intended to be conveyed to Parcel A. Under Option B, an easement for the spring through Parcel A would be required if rights to the spring are intended to be conveyed to Parcel B. Sewer is available to Parcel B through the existing public easement from Forest Hills Drive (Parcel U), while the residence on Parcel A will continue to utilize an on-site sewer system. Access to each parcel will be maintained in its current configuration the residence on Parcel A has access from Loop Road, and Parcel B also has access from a private drive with deeded access off of Forest Hills Drive. The newly configured parcels will conform to the Fortuna Zoning Ordinance. The portion to be adjusted will not negatively affect any building code standards or zoning standards. There will be no increase in the number of parcels or change in density. Before the lot line adjustment, the site consists of one vacant parcel and one parcel developed with a single family residence; the lot line adjustment will affect only the size of each parcel, decreasing the size of the developed parcel and increasing the size of the vacant parcel. The purpose of this is to create two parcels for sale that meets the needs of a potential buyer, and may be considered to be more marketable than the existing configuration. Analysis for conformance with the Residential Estates (RE-20) development standards is provided in Attachment A, Findings. Utility service providers have been contacted and have not objected to the property line adjustment. The City Surveyor has reviewed the plan and found that, based on the information presented by the applicant s surveyor, the lot line adjustment does not result in the need to relocate or create any new easements. Environmental Review: This project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act under Section 15305, Exemption 5 (a), for Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations, including Minor lot line adjustments not resulting in the creation of any new parcel. RECOMMENDED COMMISSION ACTION: 1. Receive staff presentation and review Commission questions with staff. 2. Open Public Comment. 3. Close Public Comment; voice vote. 4. Motion to Adopt Resolution P , and read by title only. Roll call vote. 10

11 Attachments: Assessor Parcel Map Aerial Photo Site Photos Site Plan Applicant s Project Description Resolution 11

12 APN APN

13 Loop Road Photo Locations (approximate) Forest Hills Drive Rohnerville Road Not to Scale 13

14 1-View towards northeast 2-View towards southeast 14

15 3-View towards northwest 4-View towards southwest 15

16 16

17 17

18 Resolution P A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Fortuna For the Carmen Smith Lot Line Adjustment WHEREAS, Carmen Smith has applied for approval of a lot line adjustment to adjust the property lines between two residential parcels; and WHEREAS, the project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act under exemption 5 (a); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered this project on this date, and made the determination that certain findings can be made, as described in Attachment A and adopted herein. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Fortuna that the project shown on the tentative map dated August 31, 2016, is hereby approved, subject to the following conditions being satisfied prior to recordation of the applicable documents: 1. A title report shall be submitted for both parcels. 3. The applicant shall submit a completed Notice of Lot Line Adjustment for each parcel. Such notice shall be approved by the City Surveyor and recorded with the Humboldt County Recorder s Office. 4. All legal descriptions prepared for the Notice of Lot Line Adjustments must be prepared by a professional licensed to perform such work. 5. If Option A is selected, an easement for city water in favor of Parcel A shall be created in such that the easement conveys at the time that Parcel A title is transferred. PASSED AND ADOPTED on this 13 th day of September, 2016, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chairman, Planning Commission ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission 18

19 Attachment A Findings for the Smith Lot Line Adjustment For Resolution P The Fortuna Zoning Code, Section requires that the decision of the Planning Commission be based on certain findings. The Planning Commission may approve a lot line adjustment only when it finds that: 1. The lot line adjustment does not violate existing codes and policies : The parcels will conform to the Fortuna Zoning Ordinance. The zone is Residential Estates (RE-20), which has a 20,000 square foot minimum lot size. The lot sizes will not be reduced below the minimum size allowed. Nor will the boundary adjustment result in the violation of any zoning standards such as lot size or setbacks. Fortuna Zoning Code: F Lot area: Minimum required area: 20,000 square feet. Meets standard: After the lot line adjustment, Parcel A will be approximately ten acres in size, and Parcel B will be 1 to 1.5 acres in size F Lot Width: Minimum width of 100 feet along the parcel frontage. Meets standard: Parcel A will have 183 feet of street frontage width along Loop Road. Parcel B will have 665 feet of frontage along Loop Road F Lot Depth: Minimum depth of 120 feet. Meets standard: Parcel A s lot depth will be a minimum of 234 feet. Parcel B has a depth of 359 feet F Setbacks: Front 20, Side 15, Rear 30. Existing residence meets standards; future development of Parcel B has adequate area to meet setbacks. 2. The lot line adjustment will not create difficult or unreasonable access to parcels : APN is developed with a single family residence and has access from Loop Road. APN has access from a an existing gravel road with deeded access off of Forest Hills Drive. After the lot line adjustment, Parcel A (APN ) will continue to have access from Loop Road, and Parcel B (APN ) will continue to access from Forest Hills Drive. Thus, access to each parcel will be maintained in its current configuration. 3. The lot line adjustment would not require variances to permit standard development : The reconfigured lots will meet the standards of the Zoning Code and therefore development may occur in the manner intended by the Code. There are no unique or unusual site conditions existing or as a result of the lot line adjustment that would necessitate a variance. Parcel A is already developed with a conforming single family residence. Future development of Parcel B would consist of a single family residence consistent with the RE-20 zoning, most likely to be located in the open grassy area; the lot line adjustment expands the potential building area that exists on to 19

20 include the grassy area on as well. There is adequate room to meet the RE- 20 building setbacks as well as Fortuna General Plan 50-foot setbacks from wetlands and creeks. 4. Utilities and public services can be provided to the revised parcels : All utilities are currently provided to the parcels. The lot line adjustment will not affect utilities or public services which are delivered from Loop Road on the north, and Forest Hills Drive on the south. Service providers have been contacted and are satisfied with the conditions of the lot line adjustment. II. Environmental Finding pursuant to CEQA: This project is subject to environmental review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and qualifies for a Class 5 exemption from CEQA. This class exempts minor alterations in land use limitations: Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations Class 5 consists of minor alterations in land use limitations in areas with an average slope of less than 20%, which do not result in any changes in land use or density, including but not limited to: (a) Minor lot line adjustments, side yard, and set back variances not resulting in the creation of any new parcel; (b) Issuance of minor encroachment permits; (c) Reversion to acreage in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act. Note: Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code; Reference: Section 21084, Public Resources Code. Comments: Slopes are limited to the Jameson Creek channel, not a buildable area, and slopes in the southwest area of the site. The buildable area in the central area of the lot, i.e. the area to be affected by construction, is level and is estimated by the City Engineer to be less than 20%. 20

21 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: September 13, 2016 TO: FROM: THRU: SUBJECT: Planning Commission Liz Shorey, Deputy Director of Community Development Regan M. Candelario, City Manager Rundell Use Permit Application PROJECT INFORMATION: Subject: Applicant: APN: Project Site: A Public Hearing to Consider Approval of a Conditional Use Permit for an Accessory Structure 18 Feet in Height. Ross and Julie Rundell (APN prior to lot split) 2220 Kenmar Road STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the use permit with conditions. Project Description: The applicant is proposing to construct a detached residential garage, 18 feet in height, to serve an existing single family residence. The project site is 1.08 acres in size, located on the north side of Kenmar Road. The site is developed with a single family residence and an outbuildng. Access is from a private road off Kenmar Road. Topography of the site is gently sloping towards Jameson Creek to the north. Surrounding uses consist of single family residential. The General Plan land use designation is Residential Low (RL); zoning is Residential Single Family (R-1-6). The purpose of the structure is for use as a shop for the personal use of the owners and storage of cars and household equipment. The proposed accessory building is 3,200 square feet in size, with a footprint of 40 feet by 80 feet. The structure is a pre-engineered metal building, 14 feet at the eaves and 18 feet at the peak, a roof pitch of 2 to 12, two roll-up doors and a walk-in door. A construction drawing of the building is included in the packet. Building colors will be taupe sand for the body and sage for the trim. Neighboring uses consist of single family residential. The nearest residence is located to the north along the shared private access road. The neighboring residence is approximately 50 feet from the common property line, and the proposed building will be 15 feet from the line (meeting the R-1-6 minimum rear setback), for a total distance of approximately 65 feet to the residence. 21

22 Building Height: The proposed building is classified by the Fortuna Municipal Code as an accessory structure (Fortuna Municipal Code ). The height limit for an accessory structure in the R-1-6 zoning district is 15 feet; a maximum height of 30 feet is allowed if a conditional use permit is obtained: Height regulations. No principal building shall exceed 30 feet in height and no accessory building shall exceed 15 feet in height. Exceptions to the height standard for an accessory building allowing a maximum height of 30 feet may be granted through a use permit. The proposed storage building is 18 feet in height, therefore a conditional use permit is being requested so that the proposed garage may be constructed at the proposed height. The attached resolution and findings for the use permit provide additional discussion. The proposed project is shown on the attached site plan. The attached Zoning/Location Map shows the location of the project and the attached Assessor's Parcel Map shows the other properties in the immediate area. Development Standards and Required Findings The Fortuna Zoning Code, Section requires the Commission to make specific finding before approving a use permit. The project-specific findings are described in Attachment 1, and demonstrate the projects conformance with the Fortuna Zoning Code, Fortuna General Plan, the City s Improvement Standards and Specifications, and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). RECOMMENDED COMMISSION ACTION: 1. Receive staff presentation and review Commission questions with staff. 2. Open Public Comment. 3. Close Public Comment; voice vote. 4. Motion to Adopt Resolution P , and read by title only: Motion to adopt Resolution No. PC , a Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Fortuna Approving a Conditional Use Permit for an Accessory Structure 18 Feet in Height. Roll call vote. Any requirements and/or modifications of the design should be included in the motion. Attachments: Location Map Assessor Parcel Map Zoning Map Aerial Map Site Photo Site Plan Neighbor s Letter of Objection 22

23 Project Location North Project Location USGS Topo Map, Fortuna Quad 23

24 Project Location Rundell Conditional Use Permit Assessor s Parcel Map 24

25 Project Location North Rundell Conditional Use Permit Aerial View 25

26 Approximate Building Location Looking North 26

27 R-1-10 Project Location Kenmar Road R-1-6 Rundell Conditional Use Permit Zoning Map 27

28 Proposed Building 28

29 29

30 30

31 Resolution P A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Fortuna Approving a Use Permit for an Accessory Structure 18 Feet in Height WHEREAS, Ross and Julie Rundell have applied for approval of a use permit for an accessory structure 18 feet in height; and WHEREAS, the proposed project, its design and improvement, conforms with the applicable local ordinances and the Fortuna General Plan if certain conditions are met; and WHEREAS, the project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act under exemption Class 3 exemption (CEQA Sec ) for new construction of small structures; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered this project on this date at a duly noticed public hearing, the staff report, public testimony, and found that the project is compatible with the surrounding area, it will not be detrimental to adjacent property owners or the public at large, and approval is in the public interest, as discussed in the Findings for Use Permits, Attachment A, hereby adopted; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Fortuna that the proposed development shown on the site plan submitted on July 27, 206 is hereby approved, subject to the following conditions being satisfied: 1. The applicant shall obtain a building permit and certificate of occupancy from the Building Division. The final site plan and construction shall comply with all requirements of the Building Code. 2. The accessory structure is not permitted as a secondary dwelling unit; a conversion to such would require compliance with the standards of Fortuna Municipal Code Section and issuance of a development permit by the Fortuna Community Development Department. 3. All requirements of the Fortuna Zoning Ordinance and of the specific zoning of the subject property must be complied with unless specifically modified by this grant, as set forth in these conditions or shown on the approved plans. PASSED AND ADOPTED on this 23 rd day of August, 2016 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: 31

32 Chairman, Planning Commission ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission 32

33 Attachment A to Resolution P Findings for the Rundell Accessory Structure Use Permit The following are the criteria and findings considered supporting the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit for the referenced project; these findings are supported by the applicant s submitted site plan. The Fortuna Zoning Code, Section requires the Commission to make specific finding before approving a use permit. Site plans must conform to the City ordinances. In addition to the discussion provided in the staff report, the following presents the project in relation to the City s ordinances and required findings: 1. That the proposed use at the size and intensity contemplated, and at the proposed location, will provide a development that is necessary or desirable for, and compatible with, the neighborhood or the community: The parcel size exceeds the minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet, providing sufficient room on the lot to accommodate the new building. The required R-1-6 setbacks (15-foot rear setback; 20-foot front setback) and lot coverage (35% maximum building coverage) are met. The nearest neighboring residence is approximately 65 feet to the north, and the building is screened by trees and other vegetation, and therefore there will be no negative impact to neighboring residences. Because of the level topography of the lot, the fact that the garage is single story, and the fact that the nearest house is approximately 65 feet to the north and is screened by vegetation, it will not negatively impact the viewshed of any neighborhing residence. The proposed use is an accessory structure that will support an existing residence. Accessory structures are permitted in the R-1-6 zone up to a maximum height of 15 feet; the Fortuna Zoning Code allows exceptions to the height standard for an accessory building allowing a maximum height of 30 feet may be granted through a use permit (FMC E). 2. That such use as proposed will not be detrimental to the health, safety, convenience, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity, or injurious to the property, improvements or potential development in the vicinity with respect to aspects including but not limited to the following: a) The nature of the proposed site, including its size and shape, and the proposed size, shape, and arrangement of structures: The proposed development represents a conditionally permitted use allowed in this zone. The size and shape of the lot is adequate to accommodate the proposed project. The arrangement of the existing structures allows for 33

34 adequate maneuvering space, required setbacks, and landscaped areas. The site has been designed to meet both the Fortuna Zoning Code and the adopted Uniform Building Code. The parcel size is 1.08 acres in size, providing adequate room for the 3,200 square foot structure. The detached garage will be constructed in a manner that is similar to other accessory structures constructed in the area. b) The accessibility and traffic patterns for persons and vehicles, the type and volume of such traffic, and the adequacy of proposed off-street parking and loading: The site and surrounding area are developed with existing single family residential developments. Surrounding roadways are sized to meet the density and type of development. There are no significant traffic issues in the vicinity. The proposed use is an accessory structure and will not generate new traffic or increase traffic volumes on adjacent roadways. c) The safeguards afforded to prevent noxious or offensive emissions such as noise, glare, dust and odor: The proposed accessory structure will serve the main residence as a garage and will not result in any noise, glare, dust or odor emissions. Construction emissions will be temporary, and will not be excessive for a project of this limited size. d) Treatment given, as appropriate, to such aspects as landscaping, screening, open spaces, parking areas, service areas, lighting, and signs: The project is an accessory structure in a residential neighborhood, and as such the Code does not require screening specifically for this type of structure in a residential neighborhood. The building height is 3 feet above the Code maximum of 15 feet. There will be no visual impacts to neighboring residences due to the distance from the nearest residence (approximately 65 feet to the north), and surrounding trees which will provide a visual buffer. 3. That such use or feature as proposed will comply with the applicable provisions of the Fortuna Zoning regulations and will be consistent with the policies and standards of the Fortuna General Plan: As proposed, the project will conform to the Fortuna Zoning Code and the City s Improvement Standards and Specifications. The project meets the Code standards for setbacks in the R-1-6 district (Front-20 feet; Side-5 feet; Rear-10 feet). The building height is 3 feet above the Code maximum of 15 feet, for which the Code allows issuance of a conditional use permit up to 30 feet in height. 34

35 General Plan Land Use Designation: Residential Low (RL) Density This designation provides for single family detached homes, secondary residential units, public and quasi-public uses, limited neighborhood-serving commercial uses, and similar and compatible uses. Residential densities shall be in the range of 3.0 to 6.9 units per gross acre. The FAR for nonresidential uses shall not exceed General Plan policy (LU-1.6): "The City shall encourage infill development on vacant sites and reuse of underutilized parcels to minimize outward groth and reduce the cost of providing public services and facilities". Response: The project supports infill development. The residential development allows infill of an undeveloped parcel that is centrally located within the City. General Plan policy (LU-4.1): "The City shall promote residential development in a range of residential densities that reflects the positive qualities of Fortuna". Response: The project reflects and supports a single family residential development, a positive quality of Fortuna. General Plan policy (LU-5.1): "Compatibility. The City shall ensure that land use and development decisions are not detrimental to the positive character and identity of Fortuna s existing residential neighborhoods". Response: The setback and existing screening ensure that the development is compatible with the neighborhood. II. Environmental Finding pursuant to CEQA: This project is subject to environmental review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and qualifies for a Class 3 exemption from CEQA: Section New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. Class 3 consists of construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures; installation of small new equipment and facilities in small structures; and the conversion of existing small structures from one use to another where only minor modifications are made in the exterior of the structure. The numbers of structures described in this section are the maximum allowable on any legal parcel. Examples of this exemption include but are not limited to: (a) One single-family residence, or a second dwelling unit in a residential zone. In urbanized areas, up to three single-family residences may be constructed or converted under this exemption. (b) A duplex or similar multi-family residential structure totaling no more than four dwelling units. In urbanized areas, this exemption applies to apartments, duplexes, and similar structures designed for not more than six dwelling units. (c) A store, motel, office, restaurant or similar structure not involving the use of significant amounts of hazardous substances, and not exceeding 2500 square feet in floor area. In urbanized areas, the exemption also applies to up to four such commercial buildings not exceeding 10,000 square feet in floor area on sites zoned for such use if not involving the use of significant amounts of hazardous substances where all necessary public services and facilities are available and the surrounding area is not environmentally sensitive. (d) Water main, sewage, electrical, gas, and other utility extensions, including street improvements, of reasonable length to serve such construction. (e) Accessory (appurtenant) structures including garages, carports, patios, swimming pools, and fences. 35

36 36