Background:
A corrected notice was mailed on April 11 to surrounding property owners including a description of the conversion of the residence at 65 Fourth Street as an additional meeting space, and the use of the backyard as a playground. The description of65 Fourth Street was inadvertently left off the first notice which was mailed on March 29. The posted sign was also corrected and replaced on site.
The Staff reports included in the record provides a detailed description of the proposal, and the issues raised. See pages 49-58 and 21-26 of the record for these reports, and pages 10-17 for the findings.
A timely appeal wars filed by Philip Lang on March 1,2005 including four objections (see below). At the time of writing, no further information had been submitted from the appellant pertaining to the specifics of the grounds for appeal and related approval criteria. Staff has reviewed the four issues initially raised, and provided information pertaining to the objections by the order used in the appellant's brief.
1. The decision is in violation of the Comprehensive Plan title on Land Use Policies.
2. The approval does not meet the approval criteria for a Conditional Use Permit.
3. The parking variance included in the decision summates with other sanctioned and non-sanctioned parking deficits to seriously degrade livability.
4. The approval countervenes both City (Council) policy on not eliminating affordable housing units as well as staff recommendation against allowing the deletion of an affordable housing unit.
Objections 1 and 2
Regarding Objections 1 and 2, Staff is unable to respond to the items until further information is providing regarding the Comprehensive Plan goals and policies and Conditional Use Permit criteria being raised.
Objection 3
Regarding Objection 3, the Planning Commission found that the proposed social hall and the use of the residence at 65 Fourth Street as a meeting space would not create a greater impact on the livability of the surrounding area compared to current church activities and compared to the target use of the property of nine residential units. Specifically, the Planning Commission discussion recognized that the Sunday services and occasional larger events did not create a significant negative impact on parking in the neighborhood. The Planning Commission found the addition of five spaces to be an improvement in the non-conforming parking situation given that the sanctuary will not be expanded and services and secondary church activities will remain at similar to current levels.
The site is considered non-conforming because the existing amount of off-street parking is less than that required by ordinance. The parking requirements for a church are based on the number of seats in the sanctuary with one parking space required per four seats. Twenty-seven off-street parking spaces are required for the church based on 108 seats in the sanctuary. Nineteen spaces are provided with eleven spaces located on site and eight off-street parking credits for the Fourth Street and C Street property frontages.
Additionally, the Planning Commission decision discusses that the site has been used for ma church for approximately 100-years. The Planning Commission recognized a need to allow adaptation of the historic non-conforming site to modem-day religious activities. The Planning Commission discussed the importance of a church being located at the center of the community and near downtown. In addition, there was recognition of the community need that is fulfilled with the secondary activities that take place at the church site (i.e. meetings, receptions, speakers and performances).
Objection 4
Regarding Objection 4, the Planning Commission found the use of the residence located at 65 Fourth Street for a meeting space and the backyard for a playground in combination with the sanctuary and social hall would not result in a greater adverse material effect on the livability of the surrounding area compared to current church activities, or compared to the target use of the site of nine residential units. The applicant testified that the residence has been used for meeting space since the church acquired the property approximately five years ago. The applicant testified to being unaware of the Conditional Use Permit requirements at the time the property was acquired. The applicant testified that the residence or "annex" has been used as a meeting space for teenagers with meetings on Sunday and one meeting during the week in the evening. The applicant testified that the meeting space provides teens with their own separate space when parents are attending functions at the church. The playground has not been installed, and would be used for children of parents attending services and church activities. The applicant testified that the residence would not be physically changed in the interior or exterior so that future use as a residence is a possibility. | 
(10846.3KB)