OCTOBER, 2003 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
OCTOBER 28, 2003
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Chair Balen
called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. Chair Balen and Commissioners Milligan,
Meatzie, Uhl and Cvar answered the roll. Commissioners Hauser and Cutter were
absent. A quorum was present.
2. CITIZEN COMMENTS AND CONCERNS: None.
3. COMMISSION COMMENTS AND CONCERNS: Commissioner Meatzie noted the car across
from his business had been moved off the public right-of-way and back onto
private property. A brief discussion ensued regarding abandoned cars on private
property. Staff noted that the City Attorney was currently looking at ordinance
language that may help to address this issue. Chair Balen noted a concern about
a house on the corner of Willow and Cedar Street, indicating that it looked like
a "junkyard". Mr. Lewis will check into the situation.
4. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES: The Commission considered the minutes of September
23 and September 30, 2003. Commissioner Meatzie moved to approve the minutes as
presented. Commissioner Uhl seconded, and the motion carried on a voice vote,
with Commissioner Cvar abstaining as he was not present at those meetings.
5. CORRESPONDENCE: None.
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Case File 1-V-03, Louise and
Charles Dane. Chair Balen opened the public hearing, noting that the application
had come before the Planning Commission on two previous occasions but had to be
postponed due to lack of a quorum. He asked for abstentions, bias, conflicts of
interest or ex parte contact. Commissioner Meatzie asked to recuse himself due
to a conflict of interest. The Commission did not object.
Applicant's Presentation: Mr. Dane addressed the Commission
regarding the application and began by stating that he appreciated the volunteer
efforts of the Commission. He noted that there had been two objections, one that
made it sound like there would be a 16-foot vacant lot, when in fact the house
occupies 14 of that 16 feet, and the other from a property owner who previously
sold off 50 feet of his 70-foot lot and now had a trailer on a 20-foot wide lot.
Mr. Dane noted that the original buildings had been built as a tourist court,
with four little two-story cottages. What they have done has been to improve the
houses but not change the footprint of the buildings. They had come to the
Planning Commission in 1996 to gain permission to build a garage for one of the
houses. The reason they were before the Planning Commission now is that they
wished to mortgage the house they have the most improvements on, and in order to
do that, the bank was requiring that the house be on a separate tax lot.
Otherwise, they would have to encumber all of the houses on the existing tax
lot. He assured the Commission that they had no intention of selling off any of
the properties, the sole purpose of the partition was to gain the mortgage. Mr.
Dane also noted that the Planning Commission would still have control over any
proposals to enlarge the buildings in the future, even if the partition was
approved.
Opponent's Presentation: None.
Chair Balen asked if the dimensions that are shown as the
amount of side yard between the buildings were put on the map by the applicant.
Mr. Lewis responded affirmatively, noting that the applicant has a surveying
background. Mr. Dane added that he no longer has an active surveyor's license.
However, he did guarantee that the measurements were accurate within a tenth of
a foot, foundation to foundation. He knew where the east property line was, as
well as the west and also noted the presence of several survey pins along the
front. The foundations are square with one another, the cottages were exactly
four feet apart. Commissioner Milligan asked if a formal survey would be
necessary to obtain final approval for the partition, and Mr. Dane responded
that he would hire a currently registered surveyor. Commissioner Cvar asked
about the dashed and solid lines on the tax map, and Commissioner Milligan
responded that the tax maps show prior property lines as dashed lines, and the
solid lines delineate the current tax lots. Chair Balen asked about the drawing
for the duplex, and Mr. Dane responded that this was a result of the computer
program he used to generate the drawing. This was actually one building. He
confirmed that the garage for the duplex sits practically on the property line,
which is why he has been careful to keep in standing. It is currently being used
for storage.
Chair Balen then closed the Public Hearing and opened the
Planning Commission meeting for deliberations. Chair Balen expressed concern
about fire danger for the entire neighborhood, as the houses are in such close
proximity. However, the buildings were there long before the property was taken
into the City. He understood that the applicant was anxious to get the mortgage
for the house without encumbering the other buildings, but also noted that the
partition gave the benefit of being able to sell off the properties
individually. Commissioner Milligan commented that the reasoning behind the
request was understandable, and also noted that she had lived in San Francisco
and other areas where the houses were always close to each other. This is a risk
a buyer takes when they purchase property. Commissioner Uhl noted that his
concern was that this would create three non-conforming lots with non-conforming
setbacks. Chair Balen agreed, and asked Mr. Lewis about the presence of so many
houses on a lot in an R-1 zone. Mr. Lewis responded that this was a lawful
non-conforming use, and would continue to retain that status. Commissioner Cvar
noted that he understood the request, but felt that the Planning Commission
should look at land use issues, not mortgage issues. This application would
create three more non-compliant lots. He stated that the Development Code was to
guide future development, to bring up the standards, and that if the area was
ever to be brought into conformance, this was a good time to start. He would not
be in favor of the partition. Commissioners Milligan and Balen noted that this
area will probably never be brought into compliance, short of taking down all of
the existing structures. Further discussion ensued. Commissioner Milligan moved
to approve the application. Chair Balen seconded. The motion failed on a tie
vote, with Chair Balen and Commissioner Milligan voting "Aye", Commissioners Uhl
and Cvar voting "Nay", and Commissioner Meatzie abstaining.
Commissioner Milligan noted that the property lines were
political, and before she saw the plat map she had not realized that all these
homes were on one lot. She stated that the street will not change, the
appearance will not change, the line is only an assessor's line. She also
reiterated that any future development would have to come before the Planning
Commission for approval. She then asked the applicant if they would be willing
to divide off only the property on which the single house stood (910 Waziyata).
The Danes responded that this would achieve the same goal, and they would be
willing to do so. Commissioner Milligan then moved to divide the property into
two parcels, the proposed Lot #1, and the remaining lot which was comprised of
proposed Lots #2 and #3. Chair Balen seconded. Discussion ensued regarding
whether conditions could be placed on the property if it ever sold. Mr. Lewis
noted that for non-conforming structures, if a building were destroyed by fire
it could be replaced on the same foundation if done within one year. Otherwise,
a new structure would have to comply with the current Code requirements. Further
discussion ensued. The motion then carried, with Chair Balen and Commissioners
Milligan and Uhl voting "Aye", Commissioner Cvar voting "Nay", and Commissioner
Meatzie abstaining. Mr. Lewis asked if the Commission would give permission for
him to draft the findings and email them to the Commission for review, then have
Chair Balen sign them in order to meet the 120-day requirements. The Commission
agreed.
B. Case File #3-V-03 - Richard Snow:
Chair Balen opened the Public Hearing, asking for bias, conflicts of interest or
ex parte contact. None were noted. Chair Balen noted that the applicant was not
present, but the Commission had read and reviewed the application. There were no
statements in opposition. Chair Balen closed the Public Hearing and opened the
Planning Commission meeting for deliberations. Chair Balen asked why the
applicant was projecting into the side yard, and Mr. Lewis responded that the
building was existing, and had a 5' setback. The applicant wished to replace the
flat roof with a 6/12 pitch roof, and in doing so he would need to have a 1 ½
foot variance to the side yard setback. The applicant could have lowered the
pitch in conformance with the setback, but felt that it would not be as
aesthetically pleasing. Commissioner Meatzie noted that in addition to the 5'
setback from the property line, there was also a 25' utility easement on the
adjoining property, where no structures could be built, so fire protection would
not be an issue. Commissioner Milligan noted that only about 15' of the existing
house is 5' from the property line, the rest is well in compliance. Chair Balen
noted that he did not like to use existing easements to enhance setbacks, as a
lot line is a line which is supposed to define a piece of property. Commissioner
Meatzie commented that the utilities are not likely to give up an easement, and
Commissioner Cvar agreed, noting that setbacks are usually set to for issues
such as fire prevention. Commissioner Milligan noted that this stretch of
Crestline looks rather blighted, and is delighted that someone is taking the
time and money to improve the property. Commissioner Meatzie moved to approve
the variance. Commissioner Milligan seconded, and the motion carried unanimously
on a voice vote. Mr. Lewis will draft the findings, email them to the Commission
for their review, and then notify Chair Balen to come in and sign them.
7. DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS:
A. City Planner Report: Mr. Lewis reviewed his written
report. Chair Balen expressed concern about the signage around the West Coast
Bank, wondering whether they were in compliance. Mr. Lewis indicated he would
look back in the file to see what signs they have permits for.
B. Code Revisions: The Commission confirmed that the workshop
on code revisions would be held on Tuesday, December 9 at 5:30 p.m. This will be
a dinner workshop.
C. Other Issues: Staff noted that there will be a holiday
party for the City staff, City Council members, Planning Commission members, and
their families on December 8, 2003 at the Senior Center, beginning at 4:00 p.m.
8. ADJOURNMENT: At 7:50 p.m., there being no further business to come before the
Commission, Commissioner Meatzie moved to adjourn. Commissioner Uhl seconded,
and the motion carried unanimously on a voice vote.
Respectfully submitted,
Reda A. Quinlan
City Clerk
APPROVED by the Planning Commission this 27th day of January, 2004.
SIGNED by the Chair this 27th day of January, 2004.
Samuel Balen, Chair