18 ATTACHMENT 13 - Laserfiche WebLink

PAUP-1, Mark and Kristina Becker Application for conditional use permit to allow four chickens at an existing single-family residence located at 2598 Skimmer Court. Zoning for the property is R-1-6,500 (Single-Family Residential) District. Ms. Decker presented the staff report, indicating that the item was continued from the June 22, 2005 meeting to accommodate the Commission's request that staff conduct noise meter readings at the project site and report the results back to the Commission and to provide the opportunity for the Commissioners to visit the site due to the testimony received at the July 27, 2005 hearing. She added that staff had received a request that the public hearing be re-opened for additional testimony. She informed the Commissioners that a copy of the staff report prepazed for the June 22, 2005 meeting and a memo dated July 21, 2005 were included in their packets. Ms. Decker then briefly reviewed the conditional use permit findings for the project. She reported that with respect to the noise meter readings, staff went to the site with the sound-reading equipment but was unable to measure any noise over the ambient noise of the neighborhood. She added staff had also received letters and comments from the public since the first hearing, including a letter from David J. Lazsen, an attorney for the neighbors who oppose the project, as well as letters and messages of support for the application. She noted that while no changes were made to the original conditions of approval, Mr. Lazsen had requested that certain conditions be modified should the Commission approve the application. Ms. Decker recommended that the Commission make the conditional use permit findings as stated in the staff report and to approve the project. Commissioner Roberts stated that she was not present at the first public hearing but that she had listened to the entire taped proceedings prior to the meeting and felt sufficiently informed to consider the matter. Commissioner Blank asked Ms. Lynn Tracy Nerland who enforces CC&Rs. Ms. Nerland replied that CC&Rs are a private agreement among the property owners typically enforced by the homeowners association or property manager. Acting Chairperson Arkin inquired if the Commission needs to be concerned about CC&Rs and to make conditional use findings that aze consistent with the CC&Rs. He fiu~ther inquired if finding the application to be inconsistent with the CC&Rs would be grounds to deny the application or if the City could approve an application that would be in conflict with the CC&Rs. Ms. Nerland replied that CC&Rs and conditional use permit applications are independent of each other and are sepazate sources of the law. It is not the Planning Commissioners' role to ensure that the conditional use permit findings are consistent with the CC&Rs. She stated that there have been cases where prohibitions in CC&Rs go beyond City requirements. She added that violations of provisions in the CC&Rs aze determined by the homeowners association or the property manager. EXCERPTS: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, July 27, 2005 Page 1 of 6