Staff Report/Resolution of Intnt – Amend Livingston Municipal Code: Building Structure Setback Requirements;Permit Requirements for Wireless Communication Facilities; And Sections Dealing with Appeal Hearings.

Note: The majority of This document was produced by taking a scanned image of the original document and running it through a program that “translates” image into text. So, sorry if there are any Goofs, Gaffs, Glitches and/or other Textual Gremlins.

STAFF REPORT

AGENDA ITEM: Resolution of Intent to Amend Livingston Municipal Code (LMC) Title 5,
Chapter 3, Building Structure Setback Requirements; to Amend LMC
Title 5, Chapter 3, Table 12, Permit Requirements for Wireless Communication Facilities; LMC Title 5, Section 5-6-9, Subsection F, and LMC Title 5, Section 5-6-10, Subsection D, and other Title 5 Sections Dealing with Appeal Hearings.

MEETING DATE: May 3, 2011

PREPARED BY: Donna M. Kenney, Community Development Director

REVIEWED BY: Victoria Lewis, Interim City Manager

ACTION INITIATING ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS:

Resolution of Intent to Amend Livingston Municipal Code (LMC) Title 5, Chapter 3 Building Structure Setback Requirements, LMC Title 5, Chapter 3; to Amend Table 12, "Permit Requirements for Wireless Communication Facilities,"; and to Amend LMC Title 5 section 5-6-9 (F), LMC Title 5 section 5-6-10 (D), and other Title 5 section dealing with Appeal Hearings.

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:

Staff was informed that the City Council may desire to consider amendments to Title 5, the Zoning Ordinance of the Municipal Code. City Council needs to approve a Resolution of Intent pursuant to LMC 5-6-2 B (2) to place the following Title 5 items on an upcoming Planning Commission agenda so that the Commission may make recommendation on the amendment(s) in public hearing and can determine General Plan consistency:

ITEM 1 – LMC Title 5 Chapter 3 Building Structure Setback Requirements

Table 8 of this Chapter provides building structure setback requirements:

(ALL SETBACKS MEASURED 1N FEET) Table 1 Building Structure Setback Requirements 1

Table 1 Building Structure Setback Requirements 2

1. Setback requirements for R-E Districts shall include a 40-foot minimum garage setback.

2. In no instance shall residence on adjoining R-2 lots be closer than eight feet, except on the side next to a street on a corner lot, which shall be fifteen feet deep. If a garage is present, or if developing on a reverse corner lot, street side yard setback shall be twenty feet.

3. Each interior lot in an R-3 district shall have a minimum side yard of five feet. Corner lots shall have fifteen feet, except in the case of a reverse corner lot or a garage; then it shall be twenty feet.

4. No minimum, except where the frontage in a block is partially in a residential district; in which case the front yard shall be the same as required in such residential district.

5. No minimum, except where the side of a lot abuts a residential district; in which case the side yard shall not be less than ten feet.

6. No minimum, except where the rear of a lot abuts a residential district; in which case a rear yard of fifteen feet shall be required.

7. Where any of the lots within the same block are already developed with front yards less than fifteen feet, then a minimum of ten feet shall be the required for the front yard depth.

8. On corner and reverse corner lots in the M-l District, the side yard which faces the street shall be twenty feet.

9. When no alley intervenes between the rear property lines, each lot in the M-1 District shall maintain a rear yard of not less than ten feet, except the rear yard may be less than ten feet when the building is built in compliance with the requirements of the Fire Code after approval from the Planning Commission is obtained.

10. As determined by Planned Development Overlay Permit.

It is unknown to staff at this time which setbacks Council desires to change. Additional code sections that may need to be reviewed and changed concurrently with this section include but are not limited to:

• LMC 5-3-16-1 provides for setback exceptions to Table 8.

• LMC 5-4 provides General Site Development Regulations including setbacks for pools, fences and hedges. For example, the twenty-foot "vision triangle" necessary for corner lots, driveways and alleys could be affected by changes to setbacks. Also, LMC 5-4-5 A (19) Off-street Parking and Loading could be affected if residential setbacks are changed (Would the Council decrease the 50% of front yard paving allowed if the front yard setback is smaller)?

• Please note that Fire Department review of any proposed setback changes will be necessary to ensure amendments comply with the State Fire Code.

ITEM 2 – LMC Title 5 Chapter 3 Permit Requirements for Wireless Communication Facilities

Table 12 of this Chapter provides the permit requirements for wireless communication facilities: (Permitted use subject to Site Plan/Design Review Permit, designated as "DR"; Conditional Use Permit required, designated as "C")

Table 12 – Permit Requirements for Wireless Communication FacilitiesTable 12

(1) If roof-mounted antenna extends above the roofline, parapet wall, or similar roof screen, a Conditional Use Permit is required to authorize the antenna.

(2) A Conditional Use Permit is required if the co-location increases the height of the existing tower/structure

As can be seen from the last two lines of the chart above, a new antenna tower only requires a Conditional Use Permit from the Planning Commission yet additional antennas co-located on an existing tower require Site Plan / Design Review by both the Planning Commission and the City Council. City Council may consider initiating an amendment that would require a new tower to go through the Site Plan / Design Review process and co-located antennas to go through the CUP process. Footnote 2 will need review and possible revision.

ITEM 3 – LMC Title 5 Chapter 6 Section 9 (F) Appeal Hearing (for a CUP)

Subsection F of Title 5 Chapter 6 Section 9 only allows the applicant (and the record owner of the real property who is also defined as an applicant per LMC 5-7-2 Definitions, Applicant) to appeal a Conditional Use Permit decision of the Planning Commission to the City Council. The language from the City’s Signage Ordinance, Title 4 Chapter 2 Section 17 Subsection C Appeals might be appropriate to consider:

"Within ten (10) days following the decision of the Planning Commission on an administrative appeal application, the decision may be appealed to the City Council by the applicant or any interested party. The appeal shall be filed with the City Clerk. The appeal shall state specifically wherein the decision of the Planning Commission was inappropriate."

ITEM 4 – LMC Title 5 Chapter 6 Section 10 (D) Appeal Hearing (for a Variance)

Similar to Subsection F of Title 5 Chapter 6 Section 9, Subsection D of Title 5 Chapter 6 Section 10 only allows the applicant (and the record owner of the real property who is also defined as an applicant per LMC 5-7-2 Definitions, Applicant) to appeal a Variance decision of the Planning Commission to the City Council. Again, the language from the City’s Signage Ordinance, Title 4 Chapter 2 Section 17 Subsection C Appeals might be appropriate to consider:

"Within ten (10) days following the decision of the Planning Commission on an administrative appeal application, the decision may be appealed to the City Council by the applicant or any interested party. The appeal shall be filed with the City Clerk. The appeal shall state specifically wherein the decision of the Planning Commission was inappropriate."

If the City Council wishes to initiate the amendments to Title 5 dealing with appeals, staff will also take the opportunity to look at other Sections affecting appeals for the Planning Commission to consider. The above suggestions for appeal language would allow any interested party to appeal a Planning Commission decision, not just the project applicant. This would allow others, such as the neighbors to a particular project to appeal the Planning Commission’s decision to the City Council.

If the City Council adopts the attached Resolution, the Planning commission will consider amendments to the above listed Sections and Tables and provide the City Council with their recommendation.

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS:

City Council direction to the Planning Commission to hold a public hearing is exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements because the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378 (b) 5 of the 2011 CEQA Guidelines.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Unknown.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution 2011 , a Resolution of Intent

Exhibit A (Strike-out & bold, underlined changes)

2. LMC Title 5 Chapter 3

3. LMC Title 5 Chapter 6

RESOLUTION 2011-_

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVINGSTON RESOLUTION OF THE INTENT TO AMEND, REPEAL, OR REPLACE SECTIONS OF TITLE 5 OF THE CITY OF LIVINGSTON MUNICIPAL CODE DEALING WITH SETBACKS,
PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS, AND APPEAL
HEARINGS AND DIRECTING THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO MAKE
RECOMMENDATION AND DETERMINE GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY

WHEREAS, the City Council desires that the Planning Commission review and provide a recommendation regarding possible amendments to Title 5, "Zoning Regulations," of the Livingston Municipal Code (LMC) concerning setbacks, permit requirements for wireless communications, and appeal hearing; and

WHEREAS, Title 5, Chapter 3 deals with Building Structure Setback Requirements; LMC Title 5, Chapter 3, Table 12 deals with Permit Requirements for Wireless Communication Facilities; and, LMC Title 5 section 5-6-9 (F) and LMC Title 5 section 5-6-10 (D) deal with Appeal Hearings for both conditional use permits and variances (Exhibit A); and

WHEREAS, Staff will also take the opportunity to look at other Sections affecting appeals for the Planning Commission to consider; and

WHEREAS, Livingston Municipal Code Section 5-6-2 (B) 2 requires that the City Council approve a Resolution of Intent to initiate an amendment to the zoning ordinance; and

WHEREAS, Livingston Municipal Code Section 5-6-2 (A) states that City zoning regulations shall be consistent with the General Plan in accordance with State Government Code, Section 65860 and the Planning Commission determines General Plan Consistency pursuant to 5-6-2 (D); and

WHEREAS, City Council direction to the Planning Commission to hold a public hearing is exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements because the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378 (b) 5 of the 2011 CEQA Guidelines.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council adopts Resolution 2011 stating its intention to amend, repeal, or replace sections of Title 5 of the City of Livingston Municipal Code dealing with setbacks, permit requirements for wireless communications, and appeal hearings, as provided for in Exhibit A, and directing the Planning Commission to make a recommendation and determine General Pan Consistency.

Page 1 of 2

Passed and adopted this 3rd day of May, 2011, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:

Rodrigo Espinoza, Mayor
of the City of Livingston

ATTEST:

I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was regularly introduced, passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livingston this 3d day of May 2011.

Antonio Silva, City Clerk

of the City of Livingston

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s