PC 072804 - Laserfiche WebLink

~.. minimum often feet is required. The property is located at 4432 First Street and is zoned R-M-4,000 (Multiple-Family Residential) District. Mr. Iserson presented the staff report and described the application to legalize the existing two-story accessory structure with a second unit on the second floor. He noted that staff had met with the applicants and their architect and lawyer to discuss various building and fire code issues that need to be addressed. He advised that the applicants have indicated that they were willing to modify the building to meet City codes if the cost is feasible and if the second unit can be retained. Mr. Iserson added that the applicants have presented an alternate plan for a new one-story garage that would meet the yard setbacks but would still require a height variance as the roof was designed to match the roof pitch of the main house. They would build this if the cost to rehab the existing structure were too great. Mr. Iserson noted that a neighbor had filed a complaint with the City and expressed concern regarding health and safety issues in connection with building and fire code compliance. He added that the City's second unit ordinance precludes putting second units on the second floor of accessory structures due to privacy issues on neighboring property owners and that staff is hesitant to create a precedent by allowing the retention of the second unit. He indicated that should the Planning Commission allow the second floor to remain, a less intense use such as storage or a recreation room would have less privacy impacts on the neighbors. Mr. Iserson concluded that non-conforming buildings such as this which were constructed without following the process are not uncommon in the Downtown azea and often fit in in terms of design and character; however, staff has concerns with the health and safety issues of this structure and recommends that it be brought up to code if it is retained. Mr. Iserson indicated that staff believes the findings can be made for the setback and height variances but not for the second unit. He recommended that the Commission make the required findings listed in the staff report for the setbacks and height variances, but not for the second unit, as well as for the alternate one-story accessory structure should the cost of upgrading the existing building be infeasible, and approve the application, subject to the conditions of the staff report as modified by the staff memo. Commissioner Fox inquired if the neighbor who filed the complaint just recently moved into the neighborhood or if there have been a series of complaints in the past which have just been brought to staff's attention. Mr. Iserson replied that he was not aware of any complaints made in the past regarding this structure and that he was not aware of how many yeazs the neighbor has been living in the area. Commissioner Sullivan commented that while the second unit ordinance does not allow second units on second floors of accessory structures, these are allowed in the Bernal Property. Mr. Iserson explained that the PUD development plan for the Bernal Property was specifically designed with second-floor second units. He added that this becomes PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 28, 2004 Page 14 of 19