Crescent City Special Planning Commission Meeting

CITY OF CRESCENT CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE Commission Members: John Wendt, Chairperson  Ray Walp, Vice-Chair Betsy Dewar  Brad Kime  Mohammed Amer Incorporated April 13, 1854 web: www.crescentcity.org AGENDA SPECIAL MEETING Thursday, July 21, 2022 at 5:30 p.m. VIRTUAL VIA ZOOM The public may access and participate in the public meeting using one or more of the following methods: 1) Participate live online via Zoom (details below) or by utilizing the link to join the meeting posted on both the City of Crescent City – City Hall Facebook page and the City of Crescent City website (www.crescentcity.org), public comment may be made by using the raise hand feature on Zoom; 2) Public comments may be made in advance by submitting written comment via publiccomment@crescentcity.org or by filing it with the City Clerk at 377 J Street, Crescent City, California, 95531. All public comments (via email or mail) must be received by the City Clerk prior to 12:00 p.m. the day of the meeting. Please identify the meeting date and agenda item to which your comment pertains in the subject line. Public comments so received will be forwarded to the Planning Commission and posted on the website next to the agenda. Written public comments will not be read aloud during the meeting. Notice regarding Americans with Disabilities Act: In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in the meeting, please contact the City Clerk’s office at (707)464-7483, ext. 223. Notification 48 hours before the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting [28 CFR 35.102- 35.104 ADA Title II]. For TTYDD use for speech and hearing impaired, please dial 711. A full agenda packet may be reviewed at City Hall, 377 J Street, Crescent City, CA or on our website: www.crescentcity.org ZOOM PHONE NUMBER: 1 (669) 900-6833 WEBINAR ID: 838 2140 8487 MUTE / UNMUTE PRESS *6 RAISE HAND PRESS *9 I. CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA II. PUBLIC COMMENT: The public may address the Planning Commission on any item of interest that is within the Commission’s subject matter jurisdiction or that appears on the agenda. The Commission is not able to discuss extensively or act on any items that do not appear on the agenda. After receiving recognition by the Chairperson, please state your name and city or county residency for the record. Public comment is limited to three (3) minutes or other reasonable limitations specified by the Chairperson on particular topics or individual speakers (Gov’t Code §54954.3(b)). III. CONSENT CALENDAR: None IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: IVA. Approve meeting minutes for June 16, 2022. IVB. Approve meeting minutes for July 14, 2022. V. CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW: VI. NEW BUSINESS: VIA- Variance Permit (VAR22-01) for Sam Schauerman Applicant requests a Variance Permit (VAR) to allow reduced setbacks for a residential eight-plex within the R-3 zone (High Density Residential District). The R-3 zone requires a 10-ft rear yard setback. The proposed variance requests a 5-ft reduction to the rear yard setbacks. The proposed eight-plex is proposed to be located within a vacant lot on 5th and C Street (APN 118-190-026). VIB- Petition for Street Name Change for Ed Edwards Applicant requests a street name change from Taylor Street to South Pebble Beach Drive between West 5th Street and West 6th Street. The proposed street name change would affect the following addresses: 520 Taylor Street (APN 118-150-011), 504 Taylor Street (APN-118-150-012), and 515 Taylor Street (APN 118-150-075). VII. CONTINUING BUSINESS: None VIII. REPORTS, CONCERNS, REFERRALS: In accordance with Gov’t Code §54954.2(a)(2), Planning Commissioners or staff may briefly respond to public comment, make brief announcements or reports, or ask questions for clarification. Planning Commissioners or the Commission may also direct staff to report back on any matter at a subsequent meeting or to place a matter of business on a future agenda. IX. ADJOURNMENT: Adjourn to the regular meeting of the City of Crescent City Planning Commission and Architectural Review Committee scheduled for Thursday August 11, 2022 at 5:30 p.m. via Zoom. POSTED: July 20, 2022 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA By: Heather Welton Office Technician PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA  IVA CITY OF CRESCENT CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE Commission Members: John Wendt, Chairperson  Ray Walp, Vice-Chair Betsy Dewar  Brad Kime  Mohammed Amer Incorporated April 13, 1854 web: www.crescentcity.org MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING Thursday, June 16, 2022 at 5:30 p.m. VIRTUAL VIA ZOOM I. CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Wendt called the meeting to order at 5:31 p.m. ROLL CALL: Commissioners present: Commissioner Mohammed Amer, Commissioner Betsy Dewar, Vice-Chair Ray Walp and Chairman John Wendt. Commissioners absent: Commissioner Brad Kime. Staff present: Council Member Blake Inscore, City Manager Eric Wier, Public Works Director Jon Olson, SHN Contract Planner Bob Brown and Office Technician Heather Welton. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: There was no public comment. III. CONSENT CALENDAR: None. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: IVA. Approve meeting minutes for May 19, 2022. On a motion by Commissioner Amer, seconded by Commissioner Dewar, and carried on a 4-0 polled vote, with Commissioner Kime absent, the City of Crescent City Planning Commission and Architectural Review Committee approved the meeting minutes for May 19, 2022 as presented. V. CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW: None VI. NEW BUSINESS : Chairman Wendt asked to go over item VIC First. VIC. Piece by Piece Pottery Kamome presentation from Jill Munger. City Manager Eric Wier gave a presentation of the mural. The presentation showed previous murals Piece by Piece Pottery has made including the mural at the Fred Endert Municipal Swimming Pool. He showed the proposed location of the mural at PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Beachfront Park and photos of the mural outline were shared as well as photos of the mural being made. Chairman Wendt left the meeting due to technical difficulties at 5:45 pm. Chairman Wendt rejoined the meeting at 5:55 pm. VIA. Approve and Adopt Resolution No. PC2022-06, A resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Crescent City Authorizing the use of Teleconferencing Provision under AB 361. On a motion by Vice Chair Walp, seconded by Commissioner Amer, and carried unanimously on a 4-0 polled vote, with Commissioner Kime absent, the City of Crescent City Planning Commission and Architectural Review Committee approved and adopted Resolution No. PC2022-06, A resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Crescent City Authorizing the use of Teleconferencing Provision under AB 361. VIB. Presentation from Contract Planner Bob Brown with SHN – Housing element update and report. SHN Contract Planner Bob Brown gave a brief presentation on the housing element. He went over the General Plan Annual Progress Reports (APR). He stated the APR finds that the current General Plan does not need to be updated and the City in 2021 was basing decisions consistent with the General Plan goals, policies, and action items. He said he will be taking this presentation to the City Council on June 20, 2022. Housing development was discussed on a Commission level. VII. CONTINUING BUSINESS: None. VII. REPORTS, CONCERNS, REFERRALS: Public Works Director Jon Olson said that the City anticipates at the next Council Meeting to award a contract to Greenworks to start the design process of Beachfront Park Master Plan. City Manager Eric Wier added items that will be anticipated at the next City Council meeting. Items listed by Mr. Wier included the new city hall design consultant, police station upgrades, a street project that will be rewarded to Hemmingsen Construction and pool upgrades. Measure S was discussed on a commission level. Transient Occupancy Tax was discussed on a commission level. X. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the Commission, Chairman Wendt adjourned the meeting at 6:31 p.m. to the regular meeting of the City of Crescent City Planning Commission and Architectural Review Committee scheduled for Thursday July PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 14th, 2022 at 5:30 p.m. via Zoom. ATTEST: ________________________ Heather Welton Office Technician PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES  IVB CITY OF CRESCENT CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE Commission Members: John Wendt, Chairperson  Ray Walp, Vice-Chair Betsy Dewar  Brad Kime  Mohammed Amer Incorporated April 13, 1854 web: www.crescentcity.org MINUTES REGULAR MEETING Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 5:30 p.m. VIRTUAL VIA ZOOM I. CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Wendt called the meeting to order at 5:32 p.m. ROLL CALL: Commissioners present: Commissioner Mohammed Amer, Commissioner Betsy Dewar, Commissioner Brad Kime, Vice Chair Ray Walp and Chairman John Wendt. Staff present: Public Works Director Jon Olson and Office Technician Heather Welton. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: There were no members of the public present at the meeting. III. CONSENT CALENDAR: None. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None V. CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW: None VI. NEW BUSINESS VIA. Approve and Adopt Resolution No. PC2022-07, A resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Crescent City Authorizing the use of Teleconferencing Provision under AB 361. On a motion by Commissioner Dewar, seconded by Vice Chair Walp, and carried unanimously on a 5-0 polled vote, the City of Crescent City Planning Commission and Architectural Review Committee approved and adopted Resolution No. PC2022-07, A resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Crescent City Authorizing the use of Teleconferencing Provision under AB 361. VII. CONTINUING BUSINESS: None. VII. REPORTS, CONCERNS, REFERRALS: Director Jon Olson gave a brief update on the Beachfront Park Master Plan meetings. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES X. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the Commission, Chairman Wendt adjourned the meeting at 5:38 p.m. to the special meeting of the City of Crescent City Planning Commission and Architectural Review Committee scheduled for Thursday July 21, 2022 at 5:30 p.m. via Zoom. ATTEST: ________________________ Heather Welton Office Technician PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES  VIA Crescent City Planning Commission July 21, 2022 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item#: VIA Application #: VAR22-01 RECOMMENDED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following actions: I) Open the public hearing. i) Receive the Staff Report on the Variance application. ii) Receive public comments on the Variance application. II) Close the public hearing. III) Adopt the Recommended Findings and conditions of approval. IV) Approve application #VAR22-01 with (any additional) the adopted conditions subject to final approval of parking layout, and direct staff to issue up to four parking waivers as needed to accommodate final parking layout. (A) BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Project: A variance to reduce the rear setback by 5ft to construct an 8-unit housing development. Applicant Elk Creek Builders LLC (Sam Schauerman) Site Address: NW corner of 5th and C streets APN: 118-190-026 Lot Size: +/- <12,674 sq. ft. / +/- 0.290 acres Project Size: +/- 9,500 sq. ft. General Plan Land Use: Residential Multi-Family 15-30 Zoning: R-3 (High Density Residential) Coastal: No Surrounding Zoning/Uses: South – R-3 High Density Residential District East – R-3 High Density Residential District West – R-2 Moderate Density Residential District North – R-3 High Density Residential District Page 1 of 8  Aerial Photo of Project Site Source: Parcel Quest, 2022 (B) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 8-Plex housing development Applicant Elk Creek Builders LLC (Sam Shauerman) has submitted a variance application (VAR22-01) to build an 8 plex housing development. The project is located on a currently vacant lot at the NW corner of 5th and C streets (APN 118-190-026) The applicant is proposing a 5ft reduction of the rear setback. Crescent City Municipal Code Section 17.16.030 states that the rear setback will be 10ft. To be in compliance, the applicant is required to obtain a variance. (C) GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY: The general plan designates the project site within the Residential Multi-Family (15-30) designation. The Residential Multi-Family (15-30) land use designation reads as follows: Multi-Family Residential 15-30 (MF 15-30) This designation provides for moderate to high density residential development within the urban boundary. Residential densities range from a minimum of 15 to a maximum of 30 Page 2 of 8  dwellings per acre. The principal permitted uses are duplexes and clustered multi-unit buildings. Other uses in this designation include two-family dwellings, townhouses (row houses), rooming houses, accessory buildings, and home occupations. The City may grant conditional use permits for churches, day care (exceeding 14 children), dormitories, guest lodging, convalescent or assisted care homes, nonprofit organizations, parking lots, and small public facilities. (General Plan, 1-7) The General Plan envisions a combination of residential uses, primarily high-density residential housing. Multi-unit residences are explicitly mentioned within the General Plan. However, the applicant is proposing reducing the rear setback by 5ft, requiring a variance permit (Crescent City Municipal Code Section 17.16.030). (See below for additional information). The City shall encourage multi-family residential development in the upper half of the density ranges prescribed by the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, subject to development entitlement, environmental, and related applicable City review and approval actions. On a case-by-case basis, the City will work with developers who agree to build projects that have a realistic unit capacity greater than half of the permitted density, provide flexibility in development standards (such as reduced setbacks, reduced parking requirements, and increased height limits), and promote density bonuses to increase densities (Crescent City Housing Element p.3) Applicable goals of the General Plan Housing Element include: Goal A: To support housing development opportunities meeting quantified City objectives (Housing Element p.1) The Housing Element supports housing development while providing flexibility in development standards such as reduced setbacks. (D) ZONING CODE CONSISTENCY: The Crescent City Municipal Code (CCMC) defines the following uses as principally and conditionally permitted within the R-3 High Density Residential District: 17.16.010 [R-3 Zone] Purpose The purpose of the R-3 high density residential district is to provide living areas within the city where development provides for high density concentrations of dwelling units together with specific ancillary and complementary uses. It is intended to implement the applicable provisions of the general plan, as amended from time to time. In the R-3 district no building or land shall be used and no building shall be erected or structurally altered unless otherwise provided herein, except for one or more of the uses set forth in Section 17.16.020. No land, building or structure shall be used, nor shall any building be constructed, erected altered, added to, enlarged or moved for any purpose or in any manner except in compliance with these regulations. (Ord. 695 § 2, 2003) 17.22.020 [R-3] Uses The principal permitted use in the R-3 district is high density residential use which includes: Page 3 of 8  A. A dwelling group or multiple dwelling commensurate with the density standards of the general plan, Section 17.16.030 and all other provisions of this code; 17.22.030 [R-3] Property Development Standards 3. Rear Yards. Ten feet. The proposed residential use is consistent with the zoning (R-3) along with the front and side yard setbacks. A variance would be needed to reduce the rear yard setbacks. See variance permit review section below. (E) SITE PLAN & ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW: The purposes of a site plan and architectural review are to permit the city to evaluate site plans and designs of structures to assure compatibility, harmony in appearance in neighborhoods, reduce negative impacts on adjacent properties and coastal visual resources, reduce the unnecessary destruction of the environment and ground cover to avoid the creation of hazardous conditions and drainage problems, to protect views to and along the coast and scenic areas, to minimize the alteration of natural landforms, and to ensure that development is compatible with the character of its surroundings, and subordinate to the character of its setting in designated “highly scenic areas;” to avoid monotonous and otherwise non-aesthetic development injurious to the overall community; to provide a vehicle to encourage full development of streets servicing the properties, and to assure full installation of all public utilities necessary to serve such properties (CCMC 17.79.010(A)). According to the CCMC 17.79.035(A) [Site Plan & Architectural Design Review] Review Standards, the application shall be reviewed for consistency with the following items: Applicable Zoning: R-3 High Density Residential (Off-street) Parking: Requirements for three or more family dwellings and dwelling groups shall be provided with one and one-half spaces per dwelling unit (17.42.040 B). The proposed development includes 14 off-street parking spaces, exceeding the required 12 off-street parking spaces. However, the proposed parking is partially located within the Public Right of Way, requiring an Encroachment Permit. Landscaping: No landscaping designs submitted; all landscaping must comply with CCMC 17.43.030. Fencing: Side and Rear yards fencing can be a maximum height six feet above grade (17.40.020 B, C). The proposed development is consistent with 6ft rear and side fences. Signage: The applicant has not proposed any signage for this development. Public improvements: It is required that the project include sidewalks, per CCMC 17.04.020. (F) VARIANCE PERMIT REVIEW: The purpose of issuing a variance permit is to assure that a degree of compatibility shall be maintained with respect to the particular use on a particular site and consideration of other existing and potential uses within the general area in which such use is proposed. Specific topics relating to compatibility are discussed below and conditions of the variance permits are recommended based on the following. Page 4 of 8 CCMC Title 17 Zoning, Section 17.16.020 allows the 8-Plex housing development within City limits, including the R-3 High Density Residential District, subject to securing a variance permit. When considering the 8-Plex housing development, the Planning Commission should consider the following: 17.56.010 [Variance] Purpose. When unreasonable and unnecessary hardships or results inconsistent with the general purpose of this title result through the strict and literal interpretation and enforcement of the provisions thereof, the planning commission of the city shall have authority as an administrative act subject to the provisions of this section, to grant upon such conditions as it may determine such variances from the provisions of this code as may be in harmony with its general purpose and intent so that the spirit of this code shall be observed, public safety and welfare secured, and substantial justice done. The sole purpose of any variance shall be to prevent discrimination and undue hardship and no variance shall be granted which would have the effect of granting a special privilege not shared by other property in the same vicinity and zone. Before any variance may be granted the planning commission or the city council on appeal, it shall be shown: A. That there are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances of conditions applicable to the property involved; B. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of the substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone and denied to the property in question; C. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which property is located; D. The granting of such variances will not adversely affect the general plan for Crescent City; E. That a public hearing wherein the applicant is heard and in which he substantiates all of the conditions cited above; and F. That the planning commission is reviewing such requests and hearing the evidence finds that conditions of subsections A through E of this section have been met. (Prior code § 30- 502) The Applicant shall provide the above information during the Planning Commission Meeting. (G) ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The proposed project is determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15305(a) and 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines: § 15305. Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations. Class 5 consists of minor alterations in land use limitations in areas with an average slope of less than 20%, which do not result in any changes in land use or density, including but not limited to: (a) Minor lot line adjustments, side yard, and set back variances not resulting in the creation of any new parcel; Page 5 of 8  § 15332. In-Fill Development Projects. Class 32 consists of projects characterized as in-fill development meeting the conditions described in this section.(a) The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.(b) The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses.(c) The project site has no value, as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.(d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.(e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. (H) STAFF ANALYSIS: Below is the staff analysis for the Planning Commission’s consideration in determining the variance permit outcome, with the Conditions of Approval found within Attachment B: A. Background Information: Staff believes that the proposed location of the variance permit will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. B. Project Description: Staff believes that the proposed activity, as conditioned (see Attachment B), will not result in significant and unavoidable impacts on the environment. C. General Plan Consistency: Staff believes that the proposed reduced setbacks for the 8-Plex housing development is consistent with the General Plan as it provides flexibility in accommodating setback reductions for multi-family housing developments. D. Zoning Code Consistency: Staff believes that the proposed project is principally permitted, but the reduced setbacks require a variance permit. Therefore, with a variance permit, the proposed project would be consistent with the R-3 High Density Residential District. E. Site Plan & Architectural Review: Applicable Zoning: R-3 High Density Residential i. (Off-street) Parking: Staff believes that the proposed parking is partially located within the Public Right of Way (ROW). Staff recommends the off- street parking layout be revised, removing any part of the proposed parking stalls out of the City ROW. Staff recommends that the commission allow staff to grant up to 4 parking waivers to accommodate this adjustment. ii. Landscaping: Any landscaping would be subject to CCMC 17.43.030. iii. Fencing: Staff believes that the proposed fencing is consistent with 6ft rear and side fences. iv. Signage: The applicant has not proposed any signage for this development. v. Public improvements: Staff recommends the installation of public sidewalks be required within City ROW per CCMC 17.04.020. Page 6 of 8  F. Variance Permit Review: Staff received no comments addressing the below items, suggesting that the proposed project does not meets the following criteria: i. Section 17.56.010(A): That there are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances of conditions applicable to the property involved; ii. Section 17.56.010(B): That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of the substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone and denied to the property in question; iii. Section 17.56.010€: That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which property is located; iv. Section 17.56.010(D): The granting of such variances will not adversely affect the general plan for Crescent City; v. Section 17.56.010(E): That a public hearing wherein the applicant is heard and in which he substantiates all of the conditions cited above; vi. Section 17.56.010(F): That the planning commission is reviewing such requests and hearing the evidence finds that conditions of subsections A through E of this section have been met. (Prior code § 30-502)). G. Environmental Review: Staff believes the proposed project meets the above criteria for the following reasons: the proposed variance consists of minor alterations in land use limitations in areas with an average slope of less than 20%, which do not result in any changes in land use or density, including but not limited to side yard, and set back variances not resulting in the creation of any new parcel; a) the proposed reduced setbacks for the 8-Plex housing development is consistent with the General Plan Designation of Residential multi-family (15-30) and the R-3 High Density Residential Zoning District with a variance permit; b) the project site is located in the City of Crescent City, is approximately 0.29 acres, and is located adjacent to medium and high density residential uses along C & 5th Streets; c) the project will be located within a developed area on a vacant lot that is surrounded by paved surfaces and contains no habitat for rare, threatened, or endangered species; d) the project proposes a multi- family residential use in a residential zoning that has a limited potential to result in significant traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality impacts; and e) the site is already served by utilities and public services. RECOMMENDED FINDINGS: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the following findings: A. The proposed location of the variance permit will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity B. The proposed variance, as conditioned, will not result in significant and unavoidable impacts on the environment. C. The proposed project is consistent with the Crescent City General Plan. D. The proposed project is consistent with the Crescent City Zoning Code with a variance permit. E. The proposed project is consistent with Site Plan and Architectural Review standards Page 7 of 8  with a variance permit, encroachment permit, and parking waiver. F. Determine if the proposed project satisfies the variance permit requirements. i. ACTION: (Yes) or (No) G. The project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under the Categorical exemption that CEQA applies to existing facilities (CEQA Guidelines §15305 and §15332). H. The proposed project may be approved with the Conditions of Approval found within Attachment B. ALTERNATIVE: If the Variance request is denied, the proposed project must be adjusted and revised to not include use of the City Right of Way. FURTHER ACTION: No further action on this item is necessary unless the Commission’s actions are appealed to the City Council within 10-days (CCMC 17.54.050). Upon approval, the staff will send the applicant an approval letter after the 10-day appeal period along with any conditions adopted by the Planning Commission during the public hearing. Upon denial, the staff will send the applicant a letter stating why the application was denied. Upon request for additional information by the Planning Commission, the staff will follow up with the applicant requesting the additional information to present at the next Planning Commission meeting. ATTACHMENTS: A) Variance Permit Application (VAR22-01) B) Conditions of Approval Page 8 of 8  VIA ATTACHMENT A  VIA ATTACHMENT B Attachment B: Conditions of Approval Conditional Use Permit #VAR 22-01: Construction of 8 plex housing On July 21, 2022, the Planning Commission approved the above application, subject to the following conditions: 1. Approval is for the project as described in the submitted Conditional Use Permit application (received 6/22/22) and included as Attachment A to the staff report. 2. The applicant will be required to comply with all requirements of the City’s Municipal Code including, but not limited to, Chapters 17.22 (General Commercial District) and 17.90 (Sale of Alcoholic Beverages). 3. The applicant must meet all requirements of the various City Departments including, but not limited to, the City Manager, Public Works Department, City Engineer, Police Department, Fire Department, Building Department, and Planning Department. 4. Apply for encroachment permit for use of City Right of Way. 5. All off-street parking spaces need to be out of the City Right Of Way (ROW) and subject to all requirements per CMCC 17.42. 6. All landscaping must comply with CCMC 17.43.30. 7. Public improvement includes installation of sidewalks, per CCMC 17.04.020. Use Permit Notes: All use permits are not personal to the applicant and permission granted under a use permit is an incident of ownership of the property for which it is granted. The owner of the property shall be responsible for compliance with the terms and conditions of issuance of a use permit (CCMC 17.54.030(B)). All use permits are always revocable and may be made conditional and shall be issued by the planning commission or by the affirmative vote of the city council upon appeal for any of the uses for which a use permit is required (CCMC 17.54.020). Page 1 of 1  VIB Crescent City Planning Commission July 21, 2022 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item#: VIB Application #: SNC22-01 RECOMMENDED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following actions: I) Open the public hearing. i) Receive the Staff Report on the Street Name Change application. ii) Receive public comments on the Street Name Change application. II) Close the public hearing. III) Adopt the Recommended Findings. IV) Recommend that City Council consider changing the name of that portion of Taylor street between 5th and 6th Street to South Pebble Beach Drive as requested in application #SNC22-01 at a public hearing of the City Council. (A) BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Project: Street name change from Taylor Street to South Pebble Beach Drive Applicant Ed Edwards Site Address: 504, 515, 520 Taylor Street APN: 118-150-011, -012, -075 Lot Size: N/A Project Size: N/A General Plan Land Use: City Right of Way / Residential Single Family (2-6) Zoning: CZ-R1B (Coastal Zone Low Density Residential Beach-District) & R-1 (Low Density Residential District) Coastal: Yes Surrounding Zoning/Uses: South – CZ-R1B (Coastal Zone Low Density Residential Beach- District) East – R-1 (Low Density Residential District) West – CZ-R1B (Coastal Zone Low Density Residential Beach- District) North – R-1 (Low Density Residential District) Page 1 of 4  Aerial Photo of Project Site Source: Parcel Quest, 2022 (B) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Planning Commission will review the applicant’s petition for a street name change from Taylor Street to South Pebble Beach Drive between West 5th Street and West 6th Street. The proposed street name change would affect the following addresses: 520 Taylor Street (APN 118- 150-011), 504 Taylor Street (APN-118-150-012), and 515 Taylor Street (APN 118-150-075). (C) GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY: At the City Council meeting held February 7, 2022, the Council directed staff on the development of a policy for the processing street name change requests. At the City Council meeting held on March 7, 2022, the Council adopted “Procedures for Street Name Change Requests” by Resolution No. 2022-19 (See attachment B). The policy can be reviewed below: POLICY: All requests for street name changes within the City of Crescent City will be processed in accordance with these procedures. Page 2 of 4  I. Contents of Street Name Change Request The request must include the following information: a. The name, address, contact phone number, and email address. b. A map depicting the street that is the subject of the name change request. The request may not include any renumbering of house numbers, or name changes mid-block or mid- street where there is not a clear delineation of street segments, such as a bend or physical obstruction. c. The current street name and the proposed new street name. d. Statement of reason(s) for the street name change request. e. Letters or a petition signed by at least 2/3 of all property owners whose street address will be changed if the request is granted (“affected property owners”). f. Requests must be submitted to the Crescent City Planning Department, 377 J Street, Crescent City, CA 95531. A petition has been received including the (a) name, address, contact phone number, and email address (see Attachment A), (b) a map (see Attachment B), (c) the current and proposed street names (see Attachment A), (d) a statement of reason(s) for the street name change request (see Attachment A), (e) signed petition from 2/3 of property owners (see Attachment A), (f) the City received these requests leading to this Planning Commission meeting. II. Planning Commission Public Hearing a. Once a request (with all required information) is received, a public hearing will be scheduled with the Planning Commission. Notice of the public hearing will be published in a newspaper of general circulation at least 10 days in advance of the public hearing. In addition, notice of the request and public hearing will be mailed to all affected property owners at least 15 days prior to the public hearing. b. The Planning Commission will conduct a public hearing to consider the request and either deny the request or recommend approval of the request. The Planning Commission may consider any and all information submitted during the public hearing from staff, the requesting party, affected property owners, and others. c. If the Planning Commission recommends approval of the request, then the request will be forwarded to the City Council for consideration and a public hearing. d. If the Planning Commission denies the request, then the applicant may appeal the decision to the City Council by filing such request to appeal the denial with the City Clerk within 15 days of the public hearing. (a) The Planning Commission Public Hearing has been scheduled on July 21, 2022, with proper public noticing, (b) the Planning Commission will hear from staff, the requesting party, affected property owners, and others during the scheduled meeting, (c) and (d) will be determined at the scheduled meeting. III. City Council Public Hearing a. In the event the Planning Commission recommends approval of a request, or an applicant appeals the decision of the planning Commission to deny a request, the City Council will hold a public hearing to consider approving or denying the request. Page 3 of 4  b. Notice of the public hearing will be published in a newspaper of general circulation at least 10 days in advance of the public hearing. In addition, notice of the request and public hearing will be mailed to all affected property owners at least 15 days prior to the public hearing. c. The City Council may consider any and all information submitted during the public hearing from staff, the requesting party, affected property owners, and others, as well as all information submitted during the public hearing at the Planning Commission. d. The approval of a street name change must be adopted by resolution to be effective. The City Clerk shall forward said resolution to the County Board of Supervisors for disbursement to the affected County departments. The City Clerk shall also notify the United States Postal Service, the City Police Department, the Del Norte Sheriff’s Office and Dispatch Center, Crescent City Fire & Rescue, Del Norte Ambulance, and local utilities. e. The decision of the City Council to deny or approve the street name change request is entirely within the discretion of the Council. The decision of the City Council will be final. The City Council will handle Section III in the event that the Planning Commission recommends approval. RECOMMENDED FINDINGS: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the following findings: A. Recommend Approval of the request and forward to the City Council for consideration and a Public Hearing. OR B. Deny request FURTHER ACTION: If the Planning Commission recommends approval of the request, then the request will be forwarded to the City Council for consideration and a public hearing. If the Planning Commission denies the request, then the applicant may appeal the decision to the City Council by filing such request to appeal the denial with the City Clerk within 15 days of the public hearing. ATTACHMENTS: A) Petition for Street Name Change B) Map of Street Name Change C) Procedures for Street Name Change Requests by Resolution No. 2022-19 Page 4 of 4  VIB ATTACHMENT A  VIB ATTACHMENT B Attachment B: Street Name Change MAP VIB Attachment C