PC 05/14/97 - Laserfiche WebLink

The zoning of the site is Service-Commercial (C-S), and the proposed storage building is consistent with the General Plan and this zoning designation. With the exception of the rear yard setback, the building improvements would meet all the development standards of the C-S District. The building has limited visibility. Landscaping/trellises will be installed where visible from Stanley and the Irby property. Staff finds the building design to be acceptable. Minor details of matching trim, etc. are acceptable to the applicant in order to match the existing building. Staff had initial concern with the metal roof material instead of a concrete tile roof, but because the building would have to be reinforced to accommodate the tiles, staff is willing to accept the metal roof as long as the colors are matched with the existing concrete tiles. Parking is not an issue in this application. If, in the future, this building is to be used independently, then additional parking would be required. There is a total of 32 spaces currently. Staff feels the landscaping is adequate; staff does believe it would be beneficial to add a small landscape strip to the rear of the site to screen views of the Public Storage building behind it. The Irby's were contacted and asked if they would allow the applicant to plant trees on their property to act as screening. The Irbys did not want to agree to tree planting. If the applicant uses vines and trellises, they will still need to have access to the Irby property for maintenance; staff will have to work with the Irbys and the applicant on this matter. The applicant has agreed to staff's suggestion of only five panels on the monument sign. Staff supports the variance in this case because of the odd shape of the lot. As is, it would be less undevelopable. Also, since the angled front property line provides less buildable area on the west side of the site than the east, the relationship between the subject property and the Public Storage property to the rear is not typical since, instead of a back-to-back relationship, it is a back-to-front siting relationship. Furthermore, because of the loading area for the Public Storage building, there is ample separations between buildings. Staff feels that the ten foot setback would serve no purpose in this case. Therefore, staff feels the proposal would fit in well with the existing development on the site and recommends approval subject to the conditions of the staff report. Mr. Iserson noted that an additional condition had been added in a staff memo indicating that the trash compactor may be stored outside. Commissioner Kumaran stated he is concerned with setting a precedent of authorizing zero setbacks. Mr. Iserson advised that they are granted only when there is merit. The City neither gains nor loses anything by granting this variance. PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Ray White represented his application. He agrees with the conditions of the staff report. PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Planning Commission Minutes Page 18 May 14, 1997