PC 100902 - Laserfiche WebLink

6. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND OTHER MATTERS ,- a. PCUP-47/PDR-183/PV-64, Waterhouse Mana2ement Company Application for (1) conditional use permit and design review approvals to allow the addition of three mobile home spaces in the existing RV storage/car wash area for property within the Hacienda Mobile Home Park located at 3231 Vineyard A venue; and (2) a variance from the Municipal Code to reduce the rear yard setback from the required 30 feet to three feet. Zoning for the property is RM-4 (Multiple-Family Residential; 4,000 square feet site area/dwelling unit). The Planning Commission will also consider the negative declaration prepared for the project. Continued to October 23, 2002. b. P ADR-643. Philip Ciesielski Application for design review approval to allow the construction of a flagpole between 28 and 31 feet in height in the rear yard of an existing residence located at 4160 Stanley Boulevard. One or two national or state flags would be flown on the pole, and the flags would be illuminated at night. Zoning for the property is R-I-20 (Single Family Residential) District. r- Mr. Iserson summarized the staff report, and noted that the applicant originally proposed that the flagpole be 35 feet in height with illumination, which was stated in the public notices. He noted that in addition to the United States flag, the applicant had indicated that he may fly the flags of other nations, as well as the Jolly Roger flag. He added that the applicant amended his proposal to remove the intention to fly the Jolly Roger flag because of the controversy engendered in his neighborhood. The applicant amended his proposal after the public noticing had been completed. Mr. Iserson noted that such a design review request was normally administrative, but because of the neighbors' objections, the application was brought before the Planning Commission. Some neighbors also expressed concern regarding the illumination of the flagpole. Staff suggested that the lighting be turned off nightly at 10:00 p.m. Staff believed that the applicant had agreed with that suggestion, but he clarified in a letter dated October 8, 2002, that he opposed turning the light off at 10:00 p.m. Mr. Iserson noted that the applicant's modified request was for a flagpole between 28 and 31 feet in height, located in the rear yard of the applicant's lot. However, the applicant, in his letter of October 8, 2002, stated that he was requesting a 3 I-foot tall flagpole. It was proposed to be illuminated with no cutoff time, and the applicant proposed to fly the American flag, as well as flags from other nations or states. He advised that the display of state and national flags were exempt from City regulation. He noted that the flagpole itself is subject to a design review. - Mr. Iserson advised that the Municipal Code allowed flagpoles up to 55 feet in residential zoning districts, subject to design review. Staff identified a number of different flagpoles around town and a close estimate of the height of each flagpole is noted in the staff report. Staff suggested a height limit of 28 feet, which was at the bottom of the range previously proposed by the applicant. He noted that 31 feet was slightly taller than flagpoles found in most residential areas, but that it was located in the rear yard and that it was surrounded by other, taller structures and trees. Staff did not believe that flagpoles would have a negative impact, and that they were a PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October 9, 2002 Page 3