Zoning Administrator

- Apologize for the delay, I was having technical difficulties at my computer so I'm moving into another location to start the meeting. So I would like to call the meeting to order the order for the zoning administrator of October 30th. My name is Jill Bergman, I'm the Community and Economic Development Director. We were unable to change the name on the Zoom, so I apologize for that. The first item on our agenda, I'm going to read a civility statement that the city uses. As city zoning administrator, I request we treat each other and our fellow members of the public with patience, civility, and courtesy as a model of the same behavior we wish to reflect in Martinez for the conduct of all city businesses and community participation. This includes respect for everyone's First Amendment rights to voice their opinion on matters within the city subject jurisdiction even if that opinion is different from your own. The decision made will be for the benefit of the Martinez community and not for personal gain. With that, I would like to move to the first item on the agenda which is public comment. This is the portion where if there is someone in the audience that would like to speak on an item that is not on tonight's agenda, they can do so at this time. If so, please use the raise hand feature. Okay. Seeing none, we will close the public comment period and we'll move to item one per public hearing which is to conduct a public hearing and adopt resolution 25-21, approving a request for a variance to reduce the required side yard setback from five feet to three feet. Reduce the required rear setback from 25 feet to 3 feet and increase the permitted lot coverage from 40% to 65% to construct 160 square foot deck addition which would be equal to 228 cumulative square feet, occupies more than 25% in the required rear yard at 138 Thistle Way. Is staff available to do a brief presentation? I'm unable to hear you. - Can you hear me now? - Yes. - Perfect, and can you see my screen as well? - Yes. - Thank you. Thank you Zoning Administrator, Jill Bergman. My name is Imanol Tovar, I'm the Planning Technician and I'll be presenting the requested variance for 138 Thistle Way. A little bit about the subject site. It is located in an R 3.5 zoning district. The existing use is a single family residence and while it is in a residential 3.5 zoning district, the subject site is 2,340 square feet, which is smaller than the required minimum lot size for a residential 3.5 lot which is typically 4,000 square feet for the minimum size. The proposed project as mentioned is a 160 square foot deck edition to the existing 120 square feet. This is a combined total of 280 square feet for their proposed deck. As you can see on the right, the existing deck and the addition will have the same setbacks as before but are extending it towards the rear yard so they will further encroach in the side yard setback and the rear yard setback. As you can see in the development standards, they are requesting a variance for both the rear side and exceeding the lot coverage here. With the variance there are findings that have to be made and they are outlined here on this slide and there is support for this variance due to the nonconforming lot size under the 4,000 square feet lot, it's not feasible to construct the deck addition without this variance and neighboring properties also have similar nonconforming situations with decks including 108, 132, 156, 114 and 120 Thistle Way. We did receive public comment I believe on Sunday so the public comment came from Heather Hills Homeowners Association that was sent to both the applicant and the zoning administrator earlier this week. And their comment was that listed here on the slide that the owner's property is not disadvantaged in any way and does not qualify for a variance and their second point was given that the variance would in fact grant the owner special privileges inconsistent with other properties in the same zoning district. Moving along with the comments, here you can see 138 Thistle Way, which is the subject site and I tried to outline in this aerial view showing where existing decks are and as you can see, the neighboring properties on Thistle Way do have similar non-conforming situations while some may have gotten permits or not, there is similar situations throughout the neighborhood as you can see highlighted in the red boxes where the decks are extended. Here are also just photos of the two images on the screen are of 108 and 132 Thistle Way that do show a larger deck than what 130 Thistle Way currently has. And with that I am here to recommend and conduct a public hearing and adopt resolution number 25-21 approving a request for a Variance to reduce the required side yard setback from five feet to three feet, reduce the required side yard setback from 25 feet to 3 feet, and increase the permitted lot coverage from 40% to 65% to construct a 160 square foot addition that occupies more than 25% of the required rear yard located at 138 Thistle Way. And with that I can answer any questions. - Great, thank you so much. Is the applicant present to also make a presentation? If you are, please use raise hand feature. Imanol, do you know if the applicant is here? - Well, they did mention that they were going to join. I do not see them on the attendees list. - Okay. Okay. With that then I will move to open the public hearing. If there is anyone who would like to speak on this item, please use the raise hand feature. Okay, seeing none, we will close the public hearing and bring it back before the zoning administration... Excuse me, administrator. Thank you Imanol for your presentation as well as all the additional information. That was some of the things that I wanted to do further research on to ensure that the PUD that was developed as part of this project didn't have set standards that we would then, you know, be modifying without the proper process. Seeing that they don't, and this now defaults to the proper process going through the R 3 zoning, after reviewing all the applications as well as identifying other decks that are similar in the neighborhood and even finding permits that indicate that in the past homeowner association has approved the ability for some of these decks to be constructed, I am inclined to go to support staff's recommendation as prepared and I wanted to thank you for that. With that approval, there is a 10 day appeal period that anyone can submit to City Hall. With that we'll move on to the next item. The next item is to conduct a public hearing and adopt resolution 25-22 approving a request by Kelly Klute for a minor exception to allow the construction of a detached two story accessory dwelling unit where one story is permitted with a different pitch roof than the primary residence at 4239 Alhambra Way in the R-6 zoning district. Brandon? Oh Salmana, after your presentation. - Thank you. Can everyone hear me? - Yes. - Okay, and can you see my screen? - Yes. - Great. Okay, good afternoon everyone. Today I'm presenting on a request for a minor exception application at 4239 Alhambra Way. So just for some background, this property is located in the residential 6.0 zone. The existing use is single family residential and then surrounding land uses are also single family residential. The applicant is proposing a detached two story ADU that is 727 square feet. The ADU will also contain an attached 191 square foot deck on the second floor. The ADU is proposed to be placed in the rear yard of the property. This proposal deviates from the Martinez Municipal Code's development standards as it proposes a two story ADU when only one story ADUs are allowed in the City of Martinez. And it proposes a roof pitch that differs from that of the primary residence. I have provided the site plan here for reference. The ADU is set back 25 feet from the side property line on the side that contains a deck and from the year the deck is set back seven feet eight inches and the ADU setback is six feet eight inches from the rear property line. However, the rear property has a higher elevation than the subject property and the deck overlooks the driveway of the rear property so it doesn't overlook the rear yard of the property at the rear. I have also provided elevations that show the height of the proposed ADU. The ADU meets all other development standards such as the setbacks, maximum and minimum unit size, and height limit of 18 feet. So whereas it's proposing a two story ADU, it is still within the maximum height limit of 18 feet. So the findings that need to be made are that the project will substantially comply with the Zoning Ordinance and the purpose and intent of the zoning district where the property is located. The project will not pose a detrimental impact to the site, adjacent properties, or neighborhood. The project will otherwise comply with applicable zoning ordinance standards and requirements. Staff believes that all of the findings can be made affirmatively subject to conditions of approval because the project does not exceed the maximum allowable height for an ADU in residential zoning districts. It does not pose a detrimental impact to the subject site, adjacent properties, or neighborhood. It does comply with all applicable building standards and it provides safe and adequate housing consistent with the intent of the R-6.0 zoning district. So staff is recommending that, conduct a public hearing to adopt resolution number 25-22 approving a request by Kelly Klute for a minor exception to allow the construction of a detached two story accessory dwelling unit where one story is permitted with a different roof pitch than the primary residence at 4239 Alhambra Way in the R 6.0 zoning district subject to conditions of approval. - Great. - Thank you. - Thank you. And Kelly, we would like to invite you to add onto that presentation if there's anything you'd like to add on. Please feel free to unmute. - [Kelly] No, they very comprehensive and I appreciate all the help that the planning department has provided along the way. So no, nothing to add, but I can answer any questions you may have. - All right, thank you so much. - [Kelly] You're welcome. - Okay. At this time I would like to open the public hearing if there are any members of the audience that would like to speak on this item to please use the raise hand feature. Okay, G Savage would like to make a comment. Go ahead. - [Savage] Hi, good evening. I appreciate the presentation. I'm actually the neighbor that lives to the left of that property, 4229 Alhambra Way. Just again, I understand the laws have changed in California, just some concerns I just wanna raise is just the infrastructure around our neighborhood. The water main has busted at least once a year, if not more along Alhambra Way, so it's like a yearly occurrence. City Works is out there constantly, so I just worry a little bit with the addition of another property and the water features and so forth going to that. And then again, the roadway has been in probably deplorable conditions since I've been there since 2012 and I know other neighbors have been there longer. So I guess I just more look at like, is the city going to look to try to improve the infrastructure around that area? Just because when we start one ADU, there may be more and then, you know, again, I'm not trying to dissuade this at all, but the other thing is, is just the height of that deck and then looking into my backyard. So I understand it's set back 25 feet, but again it's gonna be nine feet in the air so just my thoughts on that. So, hopefully again, that the infrastructure stuff would definitely be addressed at some point, but that'd be it. - I'm sorry, the structure what? - Infrastructure. - Oh, infrastructure, okay. Thank you. - With the water main and then the road and so forth, it's pretty poor conditions and I understand the state has changed with the ease of ADUs being added. But again, as more buildings go up, more people come in, it puts strain on the stuff that's already there. - Okay, thank you. Is there anybody else that would like to speak on this item? Okay, seeing none, I'll close a public hearing and bring it back before. Does the applicant... Kelly, would you like to respond at all? - [Kelly] My only comment is, I don't know about the main sewer line that runs down the street, but we've worked hand in hand with Central San throughout this whole process. Not only getting their approval, but I personally have met out with their lead field man who would be inspecting and approving it from a Central San standpoint. And so we've done everything appropriate in terms of connecting to the lateral. I don't know what the main sewer, you know, what work would need to be done there, but I just wanted to assure you that we've done everything appropriate for our onsite work. - Okay. And then Kelly, it's kind of hard to tell from the aerial, but can you tell me if there is like trees or vegetation that is being in between you and your neighbor on that side? - [Kelly] On the left side, there... Can you still hear me? - Yes. - Oh, okay. The backyard is heavily vegetated, but I'm trying to think, I haven't looked to that side frankly. Yuva, are you on the call? - Yes, go ahead. Go ahead. - Maybe you can address what's on that side as far as trees. - Yes, there should be few redwood trees will be there. Can you hear me? - Yes. - [Yuva] Yes, there is about, if you can zoom in closer on the Google maps, you'll be able to see there are trees on that side. Redwood trees are there. - Okay, thank you. - Easy to see in the Google maps. You can see in the Google maps itself. - Oh, perfect. I appreciate you sharing that. - Yeah. - Thank you. I thought I saw vegetation, I just couldn't tell if there was some ability for it to block that. Okay, that makes me feel more comfort. Thank you. - There was two, I think, so there was one on the side of 4229, but it was cut down sometime ago. Right now this one is on my side. - Okay. Okay. Thank you. All right. Okay. All right, with that I will... Oh, I think that Mr. Savage, did you want to respond? I'll give you the opportunity to respond. - [Savage] Yeah, so there is just one redwood tree which is on my neighbor's property line. I had to cut mine too down because they were dying and I didn't want 'em to fall and cause any property damage. So I had two big ones, which if those were healthy then I'd even have less of an issue because those were on my property side which I could control. But now the only one tree is on his property side, so there are no trees on my side. - Okay. All right, thank you. Okay, with that I will close the public hearing and bring it back to staff. I wanted to thank you for that comment. I initially myself had concerns related to the second story deck, but after doing kinda like a field review through Google and kind of checking out where it was positioned, I didn't have as many because the way the deck was, it was set back farther from one property, but then it was also on the one that was right adjacent to it though, it would have more of an impact. The deck was on the opposite side of that driveway going up so it didn't provide as much concern on that. The one thing that I will, you know, that that stands out to me on something like this is that, you know, they could be doing a one story one with the deck as well. So this allows, everything else is pretty much in conformance so I do see this as a minor exception to our zoning ordinance and I feel that the way it's cited and positioned that it's in the best location for the minimizing effect for impacts as well as by being able to have the two story within that same height, it allows for them to have a more efficient unit and not having to spread a larger massing footprint across the backyard. With that, I would like to move staff's recommendation as proposed and remind everyone that there is a 10 day appeal period that you can submit an appeal to the City Hall. The one thing also I wanted to respond to Mr. Savage, when it comes to the paving and the infrastructure, I would encourage you to go online. We do have a maintenance service portal where you can kind of inquire about that. We have a lot of paving payment management and projects that are in our capital project, our Capital Improvement Program, and it basically will start allying like what type of infrastructure's gonna be replaced to help understand if something is coming in your neighborhood. Primarily the streets, we're doing a lot of street improvements so that you could also contact our engineering department to see if your street is one that is slated to be on the pavement replacement project and if so like at what timeframe. So I just wanted to give you that information as well. Okay. Right? With that, let's see, I think there's... Yeah, with that I would like to adjourn the meeting of October 30th, the zoning administrative meeting. Thank you all and ave a good day. Bye.