Agenda, second session — Crescent City City Council, January 14, 2026

1 | P a g e
1/14/26 COUNCIL AGENDA

CITY OF CRESCENT CITY

MAYOR ISAIAH WRIGHT MAYOR PRO TEM CANDACE TINKLER

COUNCIL MEMBER RAY ALTMAN COUNCIL MEMBER JASON GREENOUGH

COUNCIL MEMBER STEVE SHAMBLIN
WEDNESDAY JANUARY 14, 2026 5:30 P.M.

This meeting will be held in person at the location listed above. The City will broadcast the meeting on YouTube, however, if there is a technological issue with YouTube, the meeting will continue in person as scheduled. The public may access and participate in the public meeting by (1) attending the meeting in person and making public comment when called for by the Mayor or (2) by submitting a written comment via [email protected] 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 City Council 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. 12. 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

OPEN SESSION
Call to order
Roll call
Pledge of Allegiance

PUBLIC HEARING

1. APPEAL OF VARIANCE PERMIT (APPLICATION VAR25-01) FOR DEVELOPMENT AT 511 8th STREET (APN 118-230-003)
DESCRIPTION OF VARIANCES REQUESTED: Reduced rear yard setback, reduced exterior side yard setback, parking waiver for one additional unit to back over the sidewalk POSSIBLE ACTION:
• Motion to grant the Variance Permit (Application VAR25-01) with conditions and adopt Resolution No. 2026-02, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Crescent City (or as amended by the City Council); or
• Motion to deny the Variance Permit (Application VAR25-01); or • Motion to continue the hearing to receive additional information and provide direction to staff
AGENDA

SPECIAL MEETING OF THE

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CRESCENT CITY

FLYNN CENTER BOARD CHAMBERS
981 H STREET
CRESCENT CITY, CA 95531
2 | P a g e
1/14/26 COUNCIL AGENDA

ADJOURNMENT
Adjourn to the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Crescent City on Tuesday, January 20, 2026 at 6:00 p.m. at the Flynn Center Board Chambers, 981 H Street, Crescent City, CA 95531.

POSTED:

January 9, 2025
/s/ Robin Altman, City Clerk/Administrative Analyst
Vision:

The City of Crescent City will continue to stand the test of time and promote quality of life and community pride for our residents, businesses and visitors through leadership, diversity, and teamwork.

Mission:

The purpose of our city is to promote a high quality of life, leadership and services to the residents, businesses, and visitors we serve. The City is dedicated to providing the most efficient, innovative and economically sound municipal services building on our diverse history, culture and unique natural resources.

Values:

Accountability - Honesty & Integrity - Excellent Customer Service - Effective & Active Communication -Teamwork – Fiscally Responsible

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
TO: MAYOR WRIGHT AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ERIC WIER, CITY MANAGER
BY: ETHAN LAWTON, CONTRACT PLANNER
MARTHA D. RICE, CITY ATTORNEY
DATE: JANUARY 14, 2026
SUBJECT: APPEAL OF VARIANCE PERMIT (APPLICATION VAR25-01) FOR DEVELOPMENT AT 511 8
th STREET (APN 118-230-003)
______________________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION
• Open public hearing
o Hear staff report / presentation
o Receive testimony from Appellant
o Receive testimony from Applicant
o Receive public comment
o Technical questions from the Council
• Further Council discussion
• Close public hearing
• Council deliberation
• Possible Motions:
o Motion to grant the Variance Permit (Application VAR25-01) with conditions and adopt Resolution No. 2026-02, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Crescent City Approving Variance Permit (Application VAR25-01) for Development at 511 8th Street (APN 118-230-003) (or as amended by the City Council)
o Motion to deny the Variance Permit (Application VAR25-01) o Motion to continue the hearing to receive additional information and provide direction to staff

BACKGROUND
Applicant and property owner Battery Point Group, LLC submitted an application for a variance permit to allow for a reduction of the rear yard setback from 10 feet to 5 feet and a reduction of the exterior side-yard setback from 10 feet to 8 feet 4 inches. The applicant also requested a parking waiver to allow for one additional driveway to back over the sidewalk (for a total of 4). The Planning Commission held a duly-noticed public hearing on December 4, 2025 and approved the Variance Permit (Application VAR25-01) APPEAL OF VARIANCE PERMIT (APPLICATION VAR25-01)
JANUARY 14, 2026
2 by way of Resolution No. PC2025-14. At that public hearing, appellant Ardette Esselstrom voiced her objection to the variance and submitted her objection in writing (included as part of Planning Commission Record). Following the public hearing and within the time allowed, Ms. Esselstrom filed an appeal of the Planning Commission decision.

Subsequently, Ms. Esselstrom has submitted a revised appeal document, which is also attached to this staff report.

ITEM ANALYSIS

PUBLIC HEARING
While hearing this appeal, the City Council is sitting in its quasi-judicial capacity. This means that the Council is tasked with ascertaining if the relevant facts support the findings required to be made under the regulations for granting a variance. The Council’s decision must be supported by “substantial evidence,” generally defined as enough relevant information and reasonable inferences from that information that a fair argument can be made to support the conclusion, even though other conclusions might also be reached.

This is standard that is very deferential to the decision-making body, the City Council. In addition to avoiding any conflicts of interest, Council Members are required to be fair and impartial when making a quasi-judicial decision.

The Council is limited to considering only evidence and information submitted as part of this public hearing, including the documents submitted as part of the agenda and any documents or testimony that may be presented at the public hearing. Council Members must disclose if they have had any communication regarding the variance application with either the applicant or the appellant and disclose the contents of those communications.

VARIANCE CRITERIA
Variances are covered by Chapter 17.56 of the Crescent City Municipal Code (included with this staff report for your reference). The purpose of a variance is to prevent discrimination and undue hardship. 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.

The criteria for granting a variance are as follows:

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;
APPEAL OF VARIANCE PERMIT (APPLICATION VAR25-01)
JANUARY 14, 2026
3 E. That a public hearing wherein the applicant is heard and in which he substantiates all of the conditions cited above; and
F. The conditions of subsections A through E of this section have been met.

The applicant submitted arguments and evidence in support of its application for a variance, which are included in the Planning Commission Record. If the City Council agrees with the applicant that the proposed variances meet the criteria set forth in the municipal code, then the City Council will need to adopt a resolution. Staff have drafted a resolution using the applicant’s arguments. If the City Council does not agree with the applicant that the proposed variances meet the criteria set forth in the municipal code, then the City Council simply needs to deny the application by motion.

EVIDENCE TO BE CONSIDERED
The City Council is to consider all of the evidence in the record to this point, which includes the attachments to this staff report, as well as any evidence and testimony given at the public hearing.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
If the City Council approves the variance, it will need to make a CEQA determination.

Staff have prepared findings in the draft resolution finding the proposed project to be CEQA exempt under Class 3 § 15303(b) (New Construction of Small Structures), Class 5 § 15305(a) (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations), and Class 32 § 15332 (In-fill Development) of the CEQA Guidelines.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Planning Commission Record for Variance Permit (Application VAR25-01)

2. Fire Chief Referral Response (was spoke about at PC hearing but was not included with packet)

3. Updated Site Plan (was spoke about at PC hearing but was not included with packet)

4. Resolution No. PC2025-14

5. Appeal from Ardette Esselstrom

6. Amended Appeal from Ardette Esselstrom

7. Crescent City Municipal Code Chapter 17.56

8. Draft Resolution No. 2026-02

CITY OF CRESCENT CITY

PLANNING COMMISSION & ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE Commission Members: Steve Shamblin, Chairperson * Ray Walp, Vice-Chair Kristine DeCossio * Shawna Hyatt * Vacant
Incorporated April 13, 1854 web: www.crescentcity.org
Special PC Meeting - Agenda Page 1 of 2 Thursday, December 4, 2025

AGENDA - SPECIAL PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Thursday, December 4, 2025, at 5:30 P.M.

Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP), 210 Battery Street, Crescent City, CA 95531 PART I – CALL TO ORDER & ROLL CALL

PART II - PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
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. Due to the Brown Act, the Commission is not able to discuss extensively or act on any items that do not appear on the agenda. Such items can be referred to staff for appropriate action, which may include placement on a future agenda. All comments shall be directed toward the entire Planning Commission. Any comments that are not at the podium are out of order and will not be a part of the public record. 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 (Gov’t Code §54954.3(b)).

PART III - APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None
PART IV - AGENDA ITEMS:

1. A Public Hearing to consider a Variance Permit (Application VAR25-01) for Battery Point Group’s request for reduced setbacks located at 511 8th Street (APN 118-230-003).

Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. PC2025-14: A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Crescent City Approving a Variance Permit (Application VAR25-01) granting Battery Point Group’s request for reduced setbacks. -OR-
“Provide additional direction to staff regarding the requested variances”

2. A Public Hearing to consider a Conditional Use Permit (Application UP25-03) for Enoteca’s request for a liquor license transfer located at 960 3rd Street (APN 118-120-026).

Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. PC2025-15, A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Crescent City approving a Conditional Use Permit (Application UP25-03) granting Enoteca’s liquor license transfer.

PART V – STAFF UPDATES TO PLANNING COMMISSION
PART VI – ADJOURNMENT: to 5:30 pm Thursday, January 8, 2026

CITY OF CRESCENT CITY PLANNING COMMISSION

AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
Thursday, December 4, 2025 Page 2 of 2 Special PC Meeting - Agenda POSTED on December 1, 2025 by Heather Welton, Community Development Specialist. A full agenda packet may be reviewed at City Hall, 377 J Street, Crescent City, CA or on our website: www.crescentcity.org.

THE PUBLIC IS INVITED TO PARTICIPATE IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER:
• In-Person: a 3-minute public comment at the podium will be allowed. • In-Writing: prior to 12:00 PM the day of the meeting, via [email protected] or by filing with the City Clerk at 377 J Street, Crescent City, CA, 95531. Written public comments will be forwarded to the Planning Commission, posted on the website, and will not be read aloud during the meeting.

If you have any questions about this agenda, please contact:

Ethan Lawton, Contract City Planner, at [email protected].

If you need any accommodations for the meeting, please contact:
the City Clerk’s office at (707)464-7483, ext. 223 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting.

For TTYDD use for speech and hearing impaired, please dial 711.

Vision: The City of Crescent City will continue to stand the test of time and promote quality of life and community pride for our residents, businesses and visitors through leadership, diversity, and teamwork.

Mission: The purpose of our city is to promote a high quality of life, leadership and services to the residents, businesses, and visitors we serve. The City is dedicated to providing the most efficient, innovative and economically sound municipal services building on our diverse history, culture and unique natural resources.

Values: Accountability, Honesty & Integrity, Excellent Customer Service, Effective & Active Communication, Teamwork, and Fiscally Responsible

CITY OF CRESCENT CITY

STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM #1
TO: Chairperson Shamblin and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Community Development Department, Planning & Zoning Ethan Lawton, Contract City Planner
BY: Community Development Department, Planning & Zoning Ethan Lawton, Contract City Planner
DATE: Thursday, December 4, 2025
SUBJECT: A Public Hearing to consider a Variance Permit (Application VAR25-01) for Battery Point Group’s request for reduced setbacks located at 511 8th Street (APN 118-230-003)
SECTION 1: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Battery Point Group LLC (Elk Creek
Buildings / Red Sky Inc.) submitted a
Variance Permit (Application VAR25-01) to
request a reduction in setbacks for a
proposed 4-plex multi-family residential
development located at 511 8th Street (APN
118-230-003).

STAFF RECOMMENDS: “Motion to adopt
Resolution No. PC2025-14: A Resolution of
the Planning Commission of the City of
Crescent City Approving a Variance Permit
(Application VAR25-01) granting Battery
Point Group’s request for reduced setbacks.”
-OR-
“Provide additional direction to staff
regarding the requested variances”
ATTACHMENTS:

A) VAR25-01 Application
B) VAR25-01 Conditions of Approval
C) Resolution No. PC2025-14
D) Public Comment
FIGURE 1-1: PROJECT LOCATION MAP
Source: Housing Element (December 2022)
Project
Location
City of Crescent City – Special Planning Commission Meeting Staff Report - Agenda Item: #1
VAR25-01_SR Page 2 of 19 December 4, 2025
SECTION 2: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The existing parcel consists of vacant parcel.

ADDRESS:
511 Eighth Street
Crescent City, CA 95531
APN:
118-230-003-000
PARCEL SIZE:
+/- 0.12 acres
+/- 5,227 sf
PROJECT SIZE:

0.12 acres
5,227 sf
FIGURE 2-1: PROJECT PARCEL
Source: Parcel Quest (November 2025)
The proposed project is located within the Multi-Family Residential 15-30-du per acre (MF 15-30) designation General Plan land use designation and within the High-Density Residential District (R-3) zoning designation (See Section 4: General Plan Consistency and Section 5: Zoning Consistency).

2.1. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING:

A Notice of Public Hearing was submitted to the Del Norte Triplicate newspaper (on 11/17/25) to be published (on 11/20/25) in print/online circulation and provided to the Commissioners (on 11/17/25). A similar Notice of Public Hearing was mailed (on 11/17/25) to the property owners within 300-ft of the project location (CCMC §

17.46.050) as required (Cal. Gov. Code §§ 65090 & 65094).

Public Notice Posting In Addition to Newspaper Publishing A Notice of Public hearing was posted (on 11/19/25) at City Hall, Del Norte County Library, and the Flynn Center. The notice was also posted at the project location and on the City’s website (https://www.crescentcity.org/PublicNotices).

2.2. REQUIRED FINDINGS BY THE COMMISSION:

The Planning Commission has considered this proposed project on this date at a duly noticed public hearing, staff report, and public testimony.

City of Crescent City - Special Planning Commission Meeting Staff Report - Agenda Item: #1
December 4, 2025 Page 3 of 19 VAR25-01_SR
SECTION 3: PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project includes a 4-dwelling unit multi-family townhouse residential-only development with 8 off-street parking spaces. Each unit is proposed to have market rate (typically referred to as moderate-income at 80%-120% AMI) long-term rental, two-story dwelling, 3-bedrooms, 2-bathrooms, and 2 parking spaces.

FIGURE 3-1: PROPOSED PROJECT
Source: ATT. A. VAR25-01 Application (November 2025)
The applicant has submitted the Variance Permit (Application VAR25-01) on 10/13/25, with additional submittals on 10/30/25. The application was deemed complete on 10/30/25. The applicants met with City staff to discuss the project and City requirements on 11/28/25.

3.1. REQUIRED FINDINGS BY THE COMMISSION:

Battery Point Group LLC (Elk Creek Buildings / Red Sky Inc.) submitted a Variance Permit (Application VAR25-01) to request a reduction in setbacks for a proposed 4-plex multi-family residential development located at 511 8th Street (APN 118-230-003).

City of Crescent City – Special Planning Commission Meeting Staff Report - Agenda Item: #1
VAR25-01_SR Page 4 of 19 December 4, 2025
SECTION 4: GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
The requested reduced setbacks for a proposed 4-plex multi-family residential development on a vacant parcel is located on a vacant parcel within the Multi-Family Residential 15-30-du per acre (MF 15-30) General Plan land use designation (See Figure 4-1: Section of General Plan Map).

FIGURE 4-1: SECTION OF GENERAL PLAN MAP
Source: General Plan Map (May 2001)

4.1. General Plan Land Use Designation:

The MF 15-30 General Plan land use designation principally permits “townhouses (row houses)” with “Residential densities range from a minimum of 15 to a maximum of 30 dwelling units per acre” as the intended uses “provides for high density residential development within the urban boundary.”
The requested reduced setbacks for a proposed 4-plex multi-family residential development on a vacant parcel is located on a vacant parcel is a use consistent with the MF 15-30 and is similar to some of the surrounding uses (See Table 4-1:

Comparison of surrounding Properties).

TABLE 4-1: COMPARISON OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES
Vicinity Land Use Designation Current Use
Project
Property
MF 15-30 (Multi-Family Residential
15-30-du per acre)
Vacant
North B-P (Business-Professional) Rumiano Cheese
South MF 15-30 (Multi-Family Residential
15-30-du per acre) & Open Space
Multi-Family & Single-family
Residential & Peterson Park
East MF 15-30 (Multi-Family Residential
15-30-du per acre)
Multi-Family & Single-family
Residential
City of Crescent City - Special Planning Commission Meeting Staff Report - Agenda Item: #1
December 4, 2025 Page 5 of 19 VAR25-01_SR
West MF 15-30 (Multi-Family Residential
15-30-du per acre) & B-P (BusinessProfessional)
Multi-Family & Single-family
Residential & Church of Christ

4.2. SUPPORTING GENERAL PLAN GOALS & POLICIES:
-Policy 1.A.2. - “The City shall encourage infill development that makes efficient use of existing public infrastructure and is compatible with existing development.” -Policy 1.A.3. - “The City shall encourage project sites to be designed to increase the convenience, safety, and comfort of people using public transportation, walking, or cycling.”
-Goal 1.F - “To provide adequate land in a range of residential densities to accommodate the housing needs of all income groups expected to reside in Crescent City, while ensuring a high quality of residential development.” -Policy 1.F.2. - “The City shall ensure that infill development (either new or rehabilitated residential structures) is compatible with the overall established character of residential neighborhoods.”
-Policy 1.F.3. - “The City shall encourage higher residential densities at locations where convenient access and adequate facilities, including parks and open space, are readily available.”
-Policy 1.J.5. – “The City shall ensure that all new developments in the Crescent City area be of quality design and provide an adequate level of amenities.”

4.3. SUPPORTING HOUSING ELEMENT GOALS & POLICIES:
-Policy HP-1.2. - “Encourage compatible multi-family developments on feasible lots in the Moderate Density (R-2), High Density Residential (R-3), Residential-Professional (RP), Downtown Business (C-1), General Commercial (C-2), and Commercial Waterfront (C-W) zones by adhering to minimum density standards and streamlining the application review process.”

4.4. REQUIRED FINDING BY THE COMMISSION:

The Planning Commission finds that the proposed project is consistent with the Crescent City General Plan’s MF 15-30 (Multi-Family Residential 15-30-du per acre) land use designation, in that the proposed project:
a) Is categorized as “townhouses (row houses)” with “Residential densities range from a minimum of 15 to a maximum of 30 dwelling units per acre” within the MF 15-30; b) “Provides for high density residential development within the urban boundary” within the MF 15-30; and
c) Is supported by the General Plan goal (1.F) and policies (1.A.2, 1.A.3, 1.F.2, 1.F.3, &

1.J.5).
d) Is supported by the Housing Element policy HP-1.2.

City of Crescent City – Special Planning Commission Meeting Staff Report - Agenda Item: #1
VAR25-01_SR Page 6 of 19 December 4, 2025
SECTION 5: ZONING CONSISTENCY
The requested reduced setbacks for a proposed 4-plex multi-family residential development on a vacant parcel is located on a vacant parcel within the High-Density Residential District (R-3) Zone (See Figure 5-1: Section of Zoning Map).

5.1. COASTAL: This proposed project is not located within the Coastal Zone and is not appealable to the Coastal Commission.

FIGURE 5-1: SECTION OF ZONING MAP
Source: Zoning Map
(December 2007)

5.2. USE: The R-3 Zoning District principally permits “Dwelling groups consisting of one-family, two-family, or multiple-family dwellings” (CCMC § 17.16.020(A)) as the intended uses “provides for high density concentrations of dwelling units together with specific ancillary and complementary uses” (CCMC § 17.16.010(A)).

5.3. ZONING: The requested reduced setbacks for a proposed 4-plex multi-family residential development on a vacant parcel is located on a vacant parcel is a use consistent with the R-3 Zoning District and is similar to some of the surrounding uses (See Table 5-1: Comparison of surrounding Properties).

TABLE 5-1: COMPARISON OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES
Vicinity Zoning District Current Use
Project
Property
R-3 (High-Density Residential) Vacant
North C-1 (Downtown Business) Rumiano Cheese
South R-3 (High-Density Residential) &
O (Open Space)
Multi-Family & Single-family
Residential & Peterson Park
East R-3 (High-Density Residential) Multi-Family & Single-family Residential
City of Crescent City - Special Planning Commission Meeting Staff Report - Agenda Item: #1
December 4, 2025 Page 7 of 19 VAR25-01_SR
West R-3 (High-Density Residential) &
R-P (Residential-Professional)
Multi-Family & Single-family
Residential & Church of Christ
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS & PROPOSED PROJECT:

5.4. A.Conditional Use Permit: No conditional use permit is required as the R-3 Zoning District principally permits “Dwelling groups consisting of one-family, two-family, or multiple-family dwellings” (CCMC § 17.16.020(A)).

5.5. Height and Area Regulations: All permitted uses within the R-3 Zoning District are subject to height and area regulations and are addressed below (See Table 5-2:

Comparison of Height and Area Regulations).

TABLE 5-2: COMPARISON OF HEIGHT AND AREA REGULATIONS
Standards CCMC § Regulation Proposed
Height 17.16.030(A)(1) 35-ft 24-ft
Front Yard 17.16.030(B)(1)(a) 10-ft 22-ft
[Exterior] Side Yard 17.16.030(B)(2)(b) 10-ft 8-ft, 4-in [Interior] Side Yard 17.16.030(B)(2)(a) 5-ft 5-ft
Rear Yard 17.16.030(B)(3)(a) 10-ft 4-ft
Lot Area 17.16.030(C)(1) 6,000-sf 0.12-ac / 5,227 sf
Density 17.16.030(D)(2) 30-du per acre 4-du
Lot Coverage 17.16.030(E)(1) 65% ~50%
The applicant has submitted a request to reduce rear setbacks (from 10-ft to 4-ft) and exterior side setbacks (from 10-ft to 8-ft, 4-in) which requires a Variance Permit. This item is further discussed under Section 7: Variance Permit Review below.

5.6. Parking, Fencing, and Signs: All permitted uses within the C-2 Zoning District are subject to the general requirements regarding Parking (CCMC § 17.16.070(C)), Fencing (CCMC § 17.16.070(D)), and Signs (CCMC § 17.16.070(E). These items are further discussed under Section 6: Site Plan & Architectural Design Review below.

5.7. Site Plan & Landscaping: All development within the R-3 district shall be subject to Site Plan & Architectural Design Review (CCMC § 17.16.070(A)) and Landscaping (CCMC § 17.16.070(B)). These items are further discussed under Section 6: Site Plan & Architectural Design Review below.

5.8. REQUIRED FINDINGS BY THE COMMISSION:

The Planning Commission finds that the proposed project (with a Variance Permit) is consistent with the Crescent City’s High-Density Residential District (R-3) Zoning Code, in that the proposed project:
a) Is not located within the Coastal Zone and is not appealable to the Coastal Commission;
City of Crescent City – Special Planning Commission Meeting Staff Report - Agenda Item: #1
VAR25-01_SR Page 8 of 19 December 4, 2025
b) Is consistent with the “Dwelling groups consisting of one-family, two-family, or multiple-family dwellings” (CCMC § 17.16.020(A));
c) “Provides for high density concentrations of dwelling units together with specific ancillary and complementary uses” (CCMC § 17.16.010(A)); and d) Is subject to all zoning regulations (CCMC § 17.16.010(B)).

City of Crescent City - Special Planning Commission Meeting Staff Report - Agenda Item: #1
December 4, 2025 Page 9 of 19 VAR25-01_SR
SECTION 6: SITE PLAN & ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW
The requested reduced setbacks for a proposed 4-plex multi-family residential development on a vacant parcel is located on a vacant parcel is a permitted use within the R-3 Zone (CCMC § 17.16.070(A)) requiring the scheduled public hearing for the Planning Commission to determine whether the proposed Site Plan & Architectural Design Review shall be approved or denied (CCMC §17.46.040(A)), based on the following standards:

6.1. Zoning (CCMC § 17.46.035(A)):

The proposed project is considerate of existing and potential uses of the proposed location and is consistent with the Crescent City’s High-Density Residential District (R2) Zoning Code (with a Site Plan & Architectural Design Review and Variance Permit). (See Section 5: Zoning Consistency and Section 7: Variance Permit Review).

6.2. Parking (CCMC §§ 17.22.060(A) & 17.46.035(A)):

The proposed project includes 8 off-street parking spaces which exceeds (by 2) the required 6 spaces. All residential developments with 3 or more units are required to provide 1.5 spaces per unit (CCMC 17.42.040(B)).

CCMC § 17.42.120(H)) allows the three-family dwelling’s parking to back over sidewalks, thus the variance request is to allow the fourth dwelling to do as well. This item is further discussed under Section 7: Variance Permit Review below.

With the Variance Permit, the proposed project is consistent with parking requirements.

The maintenance of off-street parking spaces is included in the Conditions of Approval (Attachment B).

6.3. Landscaping (CCMC §§ 17.46.035(A) & 17.43.010(B)):

The proposed project site contains trees and low-lying plants (similar to the Roosevelt Estates) that are consistent with landscaping requirements. The maintenance of landscaping is included in the Conditions of Approval (Attachment B).

6.4. Fencing (CCMC §§ 17.22.060(B) & 17.46.035(A)):

The proposed project does not include any proposed fencing, beyond screened trash collection (CCMC § 17.43.050(B)), and is therefore consistent with fencing requirements. Any future fencing would be subject to a fence permit.

6.5. Signage (CCMC §§ 17.22.060(C) & 17.46.035(A)):

The proposed project does not include any signage. Therefore, the proposed signs are consistent with signage requirements. Any future signage will be subject to a sign permit.

6.6. Right-of-Way (CCMC §§ 17.46.035(A) & 17.46.070):

The proposed project includes development of public sidewalks within City right-of-way in conjunction with Public Works Department and standards. Therefore, the proposed City of Crescent City – Special Planning Commission Meeting Staff Report - Agenda Item: #1
VAR25-01_SR Page 10 of 19 December 4, 2025
project is consistent with sidewalk and street requirements.

6.7. Utilities (CCMC §§ 17.46.035(A) & 17.46.070):

The proposed project includes hook-ups to existing underground provisions of water, sewage, electrical, and drainage facilities accessible to the parcel. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with public services requirements.

6.8. REQUIRED FINDING BY THE COMMISSION:

The Planning Commission finds that the proposed site plans and designs of structures (with the Variance Permit) satisfy the Site Plan & Architectural Design Review requirements (CCMC §§ 17.46.010 & 17.46.035), in that the structures:
a) Reduce negative impacts on adjacent properties, reduce the unnecessary destruction of the environment and ground cover to avoid the creation of hazardous conditions and drainage problems;
b) Avoid monotonous and otherwise nonaesthetic development injurious to the overall community;
c) Provide a [means] to encourage full development of streets servicing the properties; d) Assures full installation of all public utilities necessary to serve such properties; and e) Is consistent with the applicable zoning, parking and landscaping, fencing, signage, street, sidewalk and public services requirements.

City of Crescent City - Special Planning Commission Meeting Staff Report - Agenda Item: #1
December 4, 2025 Page 11 of 19 VAR25-01_SR
SECTION 7: VARIANCE PERMIT REVIEW PROCESS
The requested reduced setbacks for a proposed 4-plex multi-family residential development on a vacant parcel is a permitted use within the R-3 Zone (CCMC §

17.16.070(A)) which has submitted the following variance requests:

TABLE 7-1: COMPARISON OF VARIANCE REQUESTS
# Variance Request Request Standard Difference
#1 Front Yard Setback 8-ft 10-ft 2-ft
#2 Rear Yard Setback 4-ft 10-ft 6-ft
#3 Off-Street Parking over sidewalks
(1.5 spaces per unit)
4-du
(8-spaces)
3-du
(5-spaces)
1-du
(3-spaces)
Staff Analysis on Off-Street Parking:

The proposed project includes a variance request for an off-street parking standard for off-street parking spaces that back over the sidewalks:
“Ingress and egress across public sidewalks shall be made possible without the necessity of backing over the same except for property devoted exclusively to one-family, two-family or three-family dwellings. This requirement may be waived by the planning commission upon a showing of hardship and a finding that such waiver will not create a hazardous condition.” (CCMC § 17.42.120(H)) This provision allows the three-family dwellings, thus the variance request is to allow the fourth dwelling’s parking to also back over sidewalks.

VARIANCE PURPOSE.

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 (CCMC

17.56.010). 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 (CCMC 17.56.010).

City of Crescent City – Special Planning Commission Meeting Staff Report - Agenda Item: #1
VAR25-01_SR Page 12 of 19 December 4, 2025
The Variance requests required the scheduled public hearing for the Planning Commission to determine whether the proposed Variance Permit shall be approved or denied (CCMC §17.56.010(F)), based on the following standards:

7.1. Exceptional and Extraordinary Circumstances (CCMC 17.56.010(A)) That there are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances of conditions applicable to the property involved;
“The property is uniquely constrained by its smaller lot size and dimensions, limiting the ability to comply with standard setbacks while still achieving the number of multi-family units permitted by zoning. The lot's shape and area make it difficult to design functional living space, parking, and required setbacks simultaneously. The requested variances are therefore essential to utilize the property in the manner intended under its zoning classification. Also, due to the layout to maximize the space of the lot, the building is facing E Street instead of 8th Street how it was in the past. Due to this, the rear set back changed due to the layout of the building, increasing the setback from 5' to 10' due to orientation of the building.” (Provided by Applicant, see ATT.A Application VAR25-01).

7.2. Necessary Property Right (CCMC 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;
“The requested variances are necessary to ensure the property owner enjoys the same substantial property rights as other nearby owners of multi-family lots.

Several comparable properties in the immediate vicinity-such as the newer multifamily developments at 6th and D Streets and 5th and C Streets-have received similar variances for reduced setbacks and parking configurations. These projects have operated successfully without negative impact, establishing a precedent and demonstrating that granting this request would not provide any undue advantage but simply parity with surrounding developments.” (Provided by Applicant, see ATT.A Application VAR25-01).

7.3. Public Welfare (CCMC 17.56.010(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;
“The requested variances will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to nearby properties. The proposed rear and side setback reductions will maintain adequate open space, privacy, and visual harmony with surrounding structures. The parking variance is necessary because backing over the sidewalk is the only feasible parking configuration for a lot of this size and shape. Similar conditions exist throughout the neighborhood and have functioned safely without incident. Furthermore, the proposed backing area is located on E Street, a low- City of Crescent City - Special Planning Commission Meeting Staff Report - Agenda Item: #1
December 4, 2025 Page 13 of 19 VAR25-01_SR
traffic area, minimizing any potential safety concerns.” (Provided by Applicant, see ATT.A Application VAR25-01).

7.4. General Plan (CCMC 17.56.010(D))
The granting of such variances will not adversely affect the general plan for Crescent City;
“The requested variances are fully consistent with the Crescent City General Plan, which encourages development that supports housing availability and efficient land use. The proposed multi-family use aligns with the existing zoning and the predominant land use pattern of neighboring multi-family residences.

Approval of this variance will contribute positively to local housing stock and neighborhood aesthetics, transforming currently vacant land into well-designed, livable housing that complements the community fabric.” (Provided by Applicant, see ATT.A. Application VAR25-01).

Staff Analysis: The MF 15-30 General Plan land use designation principally permits “townhouses (row houses)” with “Residential densities range from a minimum of 15 to a maximum of 30 dwelling units per acre” as the intended uses “provides for high density residential development within the urban boundary.” Additionally, Policy 1.F.3. states that “the City shall encourage higher residential densities at locations where convenient access and adequate facilities, including parks and open space, are readily available.” The parcel is located where there is convenient access and adequate facilities. The designation allows 30-du per acre which permits 4-du on the proposed parcel. The variances would allow the 4-unit development for multi-family use. Otherwise, the development could be constructed at 35-ft height to accommodate the development standards.

7.5. Public Hearing (CCMC 17.56.010(E))
That a public hearing wherein the applicant is heard and in which he substantiates all of the conditions cited above; and
“The applicant will participate in the required public hearing to provide any additional documentation or testimony to ensure that all required conditions have been met. We are committed to working collaboratively with the Planning Commission to ensure the proposal meets city objectives and meets community expectations” (Provided by Applicant, see ATT.A Application VAR25-01).

Staff Analysis: A Notice of Public Hearing was submitted to the Del Norte Triplicate newspaper (on 11/17/25) to be published (on 11/20/25) in print/online circulation and provided to the Commissioners (on 11/17/25). A similar Notice of Public Hearing was mailed (on 11/17/25) to the property owners within 300-ft of the project location (CCMC § 17.46.050) as required (Cal. Gov. Code §§ 65090 & 65094). A Notice of Public hearing was posted (on 11/19/25) at City Hall, Del Norte County Library, and the Flynn Center. The notice was also posted at the project location and on the City’s website City of Crescent City – Special Planning Commission Meeting Staff Report - Agenda Item: #1
VAR25-01_SR Page 14 of 19 December 4, 2025
(https://www.crescentcity.org/PublicNotices). The applicant has submitted supporting comments for each of the items above (quoted from the application, see ATT.A. VAR25- 01 Application). 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 (CCMC 17.56.010(F)).

6.9. REQUIRED FINDING BY THE COMMISSION:

The Planning Commission finds that the proposed variance requests satisfy the Variance Permit Review requirements (CCMC §§ 17.56.010 (A through E)), in that the requests meet:
a) That there are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances of conditions applicable to the property involved (CCMC 17.56.010(A));
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 (CCMC 17.56.010(B)); 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 (CCMC 17.56.010(C));
d) The granting of such variances will not adversely affect the general plan for Crescent City (CCMC 17.56.010(D));
e) That a public hearing wherein the applicant is heard and in which he substantiates all of the conditions cited above (CCMC 17.56.010(E)); 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 (CCMC 17.56.010(F)).

City of Crescent City - Special Planning Commission Meeting Staff Report - Agenda Item: #1
December 4, 2025 Page 15 of 19 VAR25-01_SR
SECTION 8: ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION SUMMARY
The proposed project is determined to be categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to the following sections of the CEQA Guidelines:

8.1. Class 3 § 15303(b). New Construction of Small Structures, consists of the proposed project:

1. Within an urbanized area; and
The proposed project is located within City limits and is surrounded by existing development.

2. A multi-family residential structure totaling no more than six dwelling units.

The proposed project consists of four dwelling unit multi-family residential structure.

8.2. Class 5 § 15305(a). Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations, consists of the proposed project:

1. 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; and The proposed project is considered a minor alternation to setback limitations with a slope less than 20% and does not result in any changes to residential use or exceed density.

2. Minor side yard and setback variances not resulting in the creation of any new parcel.

The proposed project requests variances for minor side and rear yard setbacks which does not result in a new parcel.

8.3. Class 32 § 15332. In-Fill Development Projects, consists of the proposed project:

1. Is consistent with the applicable general plan designation, policies, and zoning designation and regulations:

The proposed project is consistent with the Crescent City General Plan’s Multi-Family Residential 15-30-du per acre (MF 15-30) land use designation and is consistent with the Crescent City’s High-Density Residential District (R-3) Zoning Code (with a Variance Permit);

2. Development occurs within city limits on a project site (<5 acres) substantially surrounded by urban uses:

The project site is located in the City of Crescent City, is approximately 0.12 acres, and is located adjacent to existing commercial uses;

3. Site has no value, as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species:

The project will be located on a site that has had past disturbances, is already developed and is surrounded by paved surfaces and contains no habitat for rare, threatened, or endangered species;

4. Approval would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality:

The project proposes commercial use in a developed commercial area that already services commercial use and has a limited potential to result in significant traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality impacts;
City of Crescent City – Special Planning Commission Meeting Staff Report - Agenda Item: #1
VAR25-01_SR Page 16 of 19 December 4, 2025

5. Site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services:

The site is surrounded by and is already adequately served by utilities and public services.

8.4. REQUIRED FINDING BY THE COMMISSION:

The Planning Commission finds that the proposed project is determined to be categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Class 3 § 15303(b) (New Construction of Small Structures), Class 5 § 15305(a) (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations), and Class 32 § 15332 (In-fill Development) of the CEQA Guidelines, in that the proposed project:
a) Is located within City limits and is surrounded by existing development; b) Consists of four dwelling unit multi-family residential structure; c) Is considered a minor alternation to setback limitations with a slope less than 20% and does not result in any changes to residential use or exceed density; d) Requests variances for minor side and rear yard setbacks which does not result in a new parcel;
e) Is consistent with the Crescent City General Plan’s Multi-Family Residential 15-30- du per acre (MF 15-30) land use designation and is consistent with the Crescent City’s High-Density Residential District (R-3) Zoning Code (with a Variance Permit); f) Is located in the City of Crescent City, is approximately 0.12 acres, and is located adjacent to existing commercial uses;
g) Is located on a site which has had past disturbances, contains existing development, and is surrounded by paved surfaces containing no habitat for rare, threatened, or endangered species;
h) Is within a developed commercial area that already services commercial use and has a limited potential to result in significant traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality impacts; and
i) Is surrounded by and is already adequately served by utilities and public services.

City of Crescent City - Special Planning Commission Meeting Staff Report - Agenda Item: #1
December 4, 2025 Page 17 of 19 VAR25-01_SR
SECTION 9: INTER-DEPARTMENTAL PLANNING REFERRALS
The Inter-Departmental Planning Referrals were provided (on 11/04/25) to other City departments which included the following comments/conditions:

9.1. Police Department: Approved with “No comments or concerns.” (11/04/25)

9.2. Fire and Rescue: None

9.3. Building Department: None

9.4. Public Works Department: Approved with the following comments (11/18/25):

1. For rear setback (east) against the property at 537 8th Street Public Works Building Department requests a fire wall on exterior wall facing east, with the rating (1-hr, 2-hr, 4-hr) as determined by building code and allowed by the City Fire Chief.

2. For setbacks adjustment to North and South side of the project, Public Works has no objection.

3. Regarding continuous roll-over sidewalk requested variance. Public Works is not in favor of allowing roll-over curb and continuous parking, as supported by the current ordinance. The loss of on-street parking and potential danger to pedestrians support the ordinance.

For this project the vehicle traffic and pedestrian traffic on E Street south of 8th Street is light. E Street is not deemed a collector street, and the addition of sidewalks on E Street and 8th Street as well as the ADA compliant ramp installed by this project will benefit pedestrian traffic.

9.5. REQUIRED FINDING BY THE COMMISSION:

The proposed project is to be subject to the Conditions of Approval found in Attachment B.

City of Crescent City – Special Planning Commission Meeting Staff Report - Agenda Item: #1
VAR25-01_SR Page 18 of 19 December 4, 2025
SECTION 10: PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION OPTIONS
The proposed reduced setbacks requires a Variance Permit within the R-3 Zone (CCMC § 17.90.010) has been scheduled for a public hearing to determine whether the proposed Variance Permit (Application VAR25-01) (See Attachment A) shall be approved or denied (CCMC § 17.54.030):

10.1. ACTION TO APPROVE. Making all the required findings. • Recommended Motion: “I move to adopt Resolution No. PC2025-14: A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Crescent City Approving a Variance Permit (Application VAR25-01) granting Battery Point Group’s request for reduced setbacks.”
• Planning staff will send the applicant an approval letter after the 10-day appeal period (CCMC § 17.46.050), along with the resolution, as adopted by the Planning Commission during the public hearing. The applicant would be granted approval on request to reduce setbacks. Approved plans, together with such conditions, shall be signed, dated, and mailed to the applicant (CCMC § 17.46.040(C)). The planning commission secretary shall place one copy of the approved plans in the files of the planning commission (CCMC § 17.46.040(C)).

10.2. ACTION TO DENY. Denying one, or more, of the required findings. • Motion Example: “I move to deny the Variance Permit (Application VAR25-01) due to the requirements not being fully satisfied, specifically regarding ________.”
• Planning staff will send the applicant a denial letter stating why the application was denied. The applicant would not be granted reduce setbacks and must resubmit a site plan that complies with standard setbacks.

10.3. DELAY ACTION BY REQUESTING ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. Requiring additional information to make the necessary findings.
• Motion Example: “I move to request additional information regarding __________ be brought back to the January 8, 2026 (or, time certain, Special) Planning Commission meeting for consideration.”
• Planning staff will follow up with the applicant requesting any additional information, which will continue this item on the next scheduled Planning Commission meeting agenda (CCMC § 17.46.050) scheduled for Thursday, January 8, 2026, or a specific alternative Special Planning Commission meeting.

City of Crescent City - Special Planning Commission Meeting Staff Report - Agenda Item: #1
December 4, 2025 Page 19 of 19 VAR25-01_SR
SECTION 11: STAFF RECOMMENDATION

1. (Chair) “Agenized Item #1: A Public Hearing to consider a Variance Permit (Application VAR25-01) for Battery Point Group’s request for reduced setbacks located at 511 8th Street (APN 118-230-003).”

2. (Chair) “I will open the Public Hearing.”

3. (Chair) “We will now receive the Presentation on the Staff Report from Planner Lawton.”

4. (Chair) “Does any Commissioners have any clarifying questions for staff?” a. (Chair) “Does the Applicant wish to address the Planning Commission?”

5. (Chair) “I will Open Public Comment, which we will receive at podium.” a. “We request that (1) you state your name and residency, (2) subject to a three-minute comment be directed to the Planning Commission for consideration, and (3) please state if you are for-or-against the proposed project.”
b. (Chair) “Any clarifying questions?”

6. (Chair) “I will Close Public Comment.”

7. (Chair) “Is there any discussion on this item from the Commissioners?”

8. (Chair) “I believe a motion would be in order.”
a. (Commissioner) “I move to adopt Resolution No. PC2025-14: A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Crescent City Approving a Variance Permit (Application VAR25-01) granting Battery Point Group’s request for reduced setbacks.” b. Note: Any changes should be included in the motion.
c. Or additional directions are provided to staff regarding the requested variances.

9. (Chair) “A motion has been made by Commissioner _________. Is there a second?”

10.(Chair) “It was seconded by Commissioner __________.”

11.(Chair) “A motion was made and seconded to: Adopt Resolution No.

PC2025-14: A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Crescent City Approving a Variance Permit (Application VAR25-01) granting Battery Point Group’s request for reduced setbacks.” a. Note: Any changes should be included in the motion.
b. Or additional directions are provided to staff regarding the requested variances.

12.(Chair) “Is there any additional discussion from the Commissioners on the motion?”

13.(Chair) “Seeing as there is no further discussion, it is time for a vote on the motion, Clerk Altman, can you poll the vote?”

14.(Chair) “The motion passes (or fails) by a vote of ___-to-___.” (Example 4-0) ----- END OF REPORT -----

THIS PAGE WAS LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
10/30/25 R-3 (17.16) MF 15-30
Return completed application to:

CITY OF CRESCENT CITY
Development Permit Application
Planning Department
377 J Street
Crescent City, CA 95531
(707) 464-9506 (707) 465-4405 fax

TYPE OR PRINT CLEARLY
Street Address
51 2~
City Zip Code
{t,. C\SS Day Phone
7'7
Street Address Day P one
707.--95/, Q:it7G,
Correspondence to be sent to l)lApplicant ,R?Representative iJ Owner Project Address 5 / ~ s
Existing Land Use
Project Acreage ~
I Al6/1A e.

Building Coverage
Building Coverage
Parking (number of spaces) '6 Paved Area Grading Required? Nb (if yes. attach preliminary grading plan) Land Division or Boundary Adjustment. (Include tentative map with existing property lines, proposed lots, lot sizes, dimensions, access, physical features and ro sed im rovcments. utili1ies. etc.)
Applicant/Representative: I have reviewed this application and the attached material. •• d information is accurate.

Property Owner/Authorized Agent: I have read this application and consent to its filing
D Architectural D Lot Line Adjustment Review
D CEQA Review
D Coastal Development Permit
D General Plan Amendment
D Municipal Code Amendment/Rezone
D Parcel Merger
D Subdivision/Minor
D Subdivision/Major
D Use Permit . L,
;gvariance or Waiverf(J.,w ~ ' cl\- )
D Home Oc Other c u ation
D Application Form
D Application Fee
DROW or Street Abandonment
D Special Review
D Supplemental Application Forms (variance home occupation, etc.

D Project property deed(s)
D Proof of applicant's legal interest in the prope11y (escrow, etc.) Project plans: *
D Project site plans (buildings, parking, etc.)
D Building floor plans and elevations
D Preliminary grading/drainage plans
D Landscaping/irrigation plans/dumpster
D Sign plans/elevations
D Color/materials samples
D Subdivision/lot line adjustment map
D Written Project Description
D Preliminary Title Report
S ecial Pro ·eel Justification/ er code
*Project Plans: For Subdivision one set of full size plans and/or one set not to exceed 11" by 18" in size are to be provided. Specific information may be re uired for Inn - ask staff for additional information. • Date Application Completed Zoning General Plan ([ UP)
CEQA: Exempt___ Negative Declaration___ Mitigated Negative Declaration___ Environmental Impact Report Review By Planning Commission. __ _ City Council___ Architectural Review_ _ _ Planning/Public Works ___ _ Public Hearing Office Hearing Appealable to Coastal Commission? Other Notes: Approved:

MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO CITY OF CRESCENT CITY
planning\planning templates\planning application Rev, 0 3/31/06 Elk Creek Builders, LLC
Battery Point Group, LLC
Red Sky, Inc
Date: 10/30/2025
To:

City of Crescent City Planning Commission
377 J Street
Crescent City, CA 95531
Subject: Variance Request - Rear Setback Reduction, Side Setback Reduction, and OffStreet Parking Waiver Property Address: 511 8th Street Crescent City, CA 95531 Dear Planning Commission Members,
I am submitting this letter to formally request a variance for the property located at 511 8th Street Crescent City, CA 95531. The request includes the following items:

1. A waiver of the off-street parking standard for exceeding three parking spaces that currently back over the sidewalk.

2. Reduction of the side setback on the 8th Street side from 1 O feet to 8 feet; and

3. Reduction of the rear setback from the standard 1 O feet to 4 feet; These variances are necessary to make feasible use of the property as zoned for multifamily development. Below are responses to the six findings required for granting_a variance under Crescent City Code.
a. Exceptional and Extraordinary Circumstances
The property is uniquely constrained by its smaller lot size and dimensions, limiting the ability to comply with standard setbacks while still achieving the number of multi-family units permitted by zoning. The lot's shape and area make it difficult to design functional living space, parking, and required setbacks simultaneously. The requested variances are therefore essential to utilize the property in the manner intended under its zoning classification. Also, due to the layout to maximize the space of the lot, the building is facing E Street instead of 8th Street how it was in the past. Due to this, the rear set back changed due to the layout of the building, increasing the setback from 5' to 1 O' due to orientation of the building.
b. Preservation and Enjoyment of Substantial Property Rights The requested variances are necessary to ensure the property owner enjoys the same substantial property rights as other nearby owners of multi-family lots. Several comparable properties in the immediate vicinity-such as the newer multi-family developments at 6th and D Streets and 5th and C Streets-have received similar variances for reduced setbacks and parking configurations. These projects have operated successfully without negative impact, establishing a precedent and demonstrating that granting this request would not provide any undue advantage but simply parity with surrounding developments. c. No Material Detriment to Public Welfare or Neighboring Properties The requested variances will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to nearby properties. The proposed rear and side setback reductions will maintain adequate open space, privacy, and visual harmony with surrounding structures.

The parking variance is necessary because backing over the sidewalk is the only feasible parking configuration for a lot of this size and shape. Similar conditions exist throughout the neighborhood and have functioned safely without incident. Furthermore, the proposed backing area is located on E Street, a low-traffic area, minimizing any potential safety concerns.
d. Consistency with the General Plan
The requested variances are fully consistent with the Crescent City General Plan, which encourages development that supports housing availability and efficient land use. The proposed multi-family use aligns with the existing zoning and the predominant land use pattern of neighboring multi-family residences. Approval of this variance will contribute positively to local housing stock and neighborhood aesthetics, transforming currently vacant land into well-designed, livable housing that complements the community fabric. e. Public Hearing
The applicant will participate in the required public hearing to provide any additional documentation or testimony to ensure that all required conditions have been met. We are committed to working collaboratively with the Planning Commission to ensure the proposal meets city objectives and community expectations.
f. Planning Commission Findings
We respectfully request that, upon review of this application and supporting evidence, the Planning Commission find that the conditions outlined in subsections (a) through (e) have been satisfied and that approval of the requested variances is appropriate and in the public interest.

Conclusion
Granting this variance will allow the property to be developed in a manner consistent with surrounding multi-family homes, improve the appearance and utility of currently vacant land, and help address Crescent City's housing needs. The requested modifications are modest, well-supported by local precedent, and consistent with both the zoning intent and general plan.

Thank you for your time and consideration. Please contact me if additional information or supporting ma eria s are neeaed prior to the nearing.

Sam Schauerman, Member
Elk Creek Builders, LLC
511 8th st. Crescent city Ca 95531
4-plex materials to be used

EXTERIOR
•siding detail to be hardy concrete lap.staggered shingles,board and batten •All exterior trim and facia hardy concrete
•windows white simonton
•roofing black presidential
•white gutters
•exterior paint to be colors similar to Roosevelt estates pictures provided •exterior doors to be solid fiberglass style similar to Roosevelt estates

LANDSCAPING
• exterior land surface to be covered by geotextile filter fabric covered by cobble stone • Plants to be similar to Roosevelt estates with trees and low lying plants I
-F
\j)
u...~ \\ I\
3 '9)- d\h'~
U '{\ \ Yi
7:,£,C ---
" o-... A ('")r"'-\.\. c:A ,:, \ "'
A
4'
\l,· ,n. t
l c.J ;. 1 ;t. ' I
~-
~\t:/''{
h\\ o-\~ ,._/\1 0
i
l
j
j J
i ;

511 8th St • Crescent City, CA
95531
Oct 28, 2025, 3:39 PM
by Troy Duncan
511 8th St • Crescent City, CA
95531
Oct 28, 2025, 3:39 PM
by Troy Duncan
511 8th St• Crescent City, CA 95531
Oct 28, 2025, 3:24 PM
by Troy Duncan
511 8th St • Crescent City, CA
95531
Oct 28, 2025, 3:28 PM
by Troy Duncan
511 8th St• Crescent City, CA
95531
Oct 28, 2025, 3:24 PM
by Troy Duncan
511 8th St• Crescent City, CA
95531
Oct 28, 2025, 3:24 PM
by Troy Duncan
511 8th St• Crescent City, CA
95531
Oct 28, 2025, 3:23 PM
by Troy Duncan
511 8th St• Crescent City, CA
95531
Oct 28, 2025, 3:24 PM
by Troy Duncan
511 8th St• Crescent City, CA
95531
Oct 28, 2025, 3:28 PM
by Troy Duncan

I
I
I
I
511 8th St• Crescent City, CA
95531
Oct 28, 2025, 3:22 PM
by Troy Duncan
511 8th St• Crescent City, CA
95531
Oct 28, 2025, 3:23 PM
by Troy Duncan
511 8th St• Crescent City, CA 95531
Oct 28, 2025, 3:22 PM
by Troy Duncan
511 8th St• Crescent City, CA 95531
Oct 28, 2025, 3:22 PM
by Troy Duncan

CITY OF CRESCENT CITY

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT - PLANNING & ZONING
377 J Street, Crescent City, CA 95531 (707-464-9506)
Incorporated April 13, 1854 web: www.crescentcity.org
VAR25-01_COA Page 1 of 2 December 4, 2025

DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Variance Permit – Application VAR25-01
On December 4, 2025, the City of Crescent City’s Planning Commission held a Public Hearing in which they voted to APPROVE (by adopting Resolution PC2025-14), to grant Battery Point Group LLC (Elk Creek Buildings / Red Sky Inc.) a Variance Permit (Application VAR25-01) for a proposed reduction in setbacks for a proposed 4-plex multi-family residential development on a vacant lot within the R-3 Zoning (High-Density Residential District) located at 511 8th Street (APN 118-230-003), subject to the following conditions:

1. Zoning. The applicant shall be required to maintain compliance with all requirements of the City’s Municipal Code including, but not limited to, Chapter

17.16 (High-Density Residential District).

2. Variance. The approved project shall be limited according to the approved variance (VAR25-01) dated 10/13/25 or as modified by the Planning Commission.

3. Site Plan & Architectural Design. The approved project shall be constructed according to the approved site plan & architectural design dated 10/30/25 or as modified by the Planning Commission.
a. Expiration. A site plan or architectural design approval shall lapse and shall become void one year following the date on which approval by the committee, planning commission or city council became effective unless prior to the expiration of one year a building permit is issued by the building official, and the construction is commenced and diligently pursued toward completion on the site or structures which were the subject of the site plan or architectural design approval (CCMC §17.46.090(A)). b. Extension. Approval may be extended for an additional period for periods of one year upon written application to the planning commission before expiration of the first approval (CCMC §17.46.090(B)).
c. Transfer. A site plan or architectural design approved pursuant to the provisions of chapter 17.46 shall run with the land and shall continue to be valid upon the change of ownership of the site which was the subject of the site plan or architectural design approval, subject to the provisions of Section 17.46.090 (CCMC §17.46.100).
d. Revisions. Any minor deviations from approved plans may be approved by the Director of the Community Development Department.

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Variance Permit - Application VAR25-01
VAR25-01_COA Page 2 of 2 December 4, 2025

4. Off-Street Parking. It is unlawful for any person, firm or corporation who owns, leases or controls a building or structure to fail, neglect or refuse to provide and maintain off-street parking and loading facilities as required (CCMC §17.42.010). a. Required. All off-street parking spaces shall be maintained in accordance with the Off-Street Parking regulations (CCMC §17.42.120(B)). b. Use. No sale, storage, repair work, dismantling or servicing of any kind shall be permitted on required parking spaces (CCMC §17.42.120(G)).

5. Landscaping. Property owners or occupants shall maintain landscaping to be free from physical damage or injury arising from lack of water, chemical damage, insects, and diseases (CCMC §17.43.020(G)).
a. Replacement. The property owner shall immediately replace any plant material that dies, deteriorates, or is damaged by the causes listed above (CCMC §17.43.020(G)).
b. Appearance. Planting areas shall be kept free from weeds, debris, and undesirable materials which may be detrimental to safety, drainage, or appearance (CCMC §17.43.040(C)).
c. Maintenance. Trees, shrubs, hedges, and other plant materials shall be maintained so as not to create sight hazard as determined by the Director of Public Works (CCMC §17.43.040(D)).

6. Departments. The applicant shall comply with permit requirements of the City of Crescent City’s Public Works Department, Police Department, Fire & Rescue, Finance Department, and Community Development Department, as applicable.

7. Building Department. The applicant shall comply with permit requirements of the City of Crescent City’s Building Department.
a. Building Permit. Before a building permit shall be issued for any building or structure proposed as part of an approved site plan or architectural design, the building official shall determine that the proposed building location facilities and improvements are in conformity with the plans and conditions approved by the Planning Commission (CCMC §17.46.080(A)). b. Issuance. The Building Permit shall not be issued until the effective date of this notice, shown below.
c. Certificate of Occupancy. Before a building may be occupied the building official shall certify that the site or structure has been developed in conformity with the plans and conditions approved in this chapter (CCMC §17.46.080(B)).

CITY OF CRESCENT CITY

PLANNING COMMISSION & ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE Commission Members: Steve Shamblin, Chairperson * Ray Walp, Vice-Chair Candace Tinkler * Kristine DeCossio * Vacant
Incorporated April 13, 1854 web: www.crescentcity.org
Resolution No. PC2025-14 Page 1 of 3 December 4, 2025
DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. PC2025-14

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF

CRESCENT CITY APPROVING A VARIANCE PERMIT (APPLICATION
VAR25-01) GRANTING BATTERY POINT GROUP’S REQUEST FOR

REDUCED SETBACKS
WHEREAS, Battery Point Group LLC (Elk Creek Buildings / Red Sky Inc.) submitted a Variance Permit (Application VAR25-01) to request a reduction in setbacks for a proposed 4-plex multi-family residential development located at 511 8th Street (APN 118-230-003);
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered this proposed project on this date at a duly noticed public hearing, staff report, and public testimony; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the proposed project is consistent with the Crescent City General Plan’s MF 15-30 (Multi-Family Residential 15- 30-du per acre) land use designation, in that the proposed project:
a. Is categorized as “townhouses (row houses)” with “Residential densities range from a minimum of 15 to a maximum of 30 dwelling units per acre” within the MF 15-30; b. “Provides for high density residential development within the urban boundary” within the MF 15-30; and
c. Is supported by the General Plan goal (1.F) and policies (1.A.2, 1.A.3, 1.F.2, 1.F.3, &

1.J.5).
d. Is supported by the Housing Element policy HP-1.2.

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the proposed project (with a Variance Permit) is consistent with the Crescent City’s High-Density Residential District (R-3) Zoning Code, in that the proposed project:
a) Is not located within the Coastal Zone and is not appealable to the Coastal Commission;
b) Is consistent with the “Dwelling groups consisting of one-family, two-family, or multiple-family dwellings” (CCMC § 17.16.020(A));
c) “Provides for high density concentrations of dwelling units together with specific ancillary and complementary uses” (CCMC § 17.16.010(A)); and d) Is subject to all zoning regulations (CCMC § 17.16.010(B)).

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the proposed site plans and designs of structures (with the Variance Permit) satisfy the Site Plan & Architectural Design Review requirements (CCMC §§ 17.46.010 & 17.46.035), in that the structures:

VARIANCE PERMIT (APPLICATION VAR25-01)
For reduced setbacks
December 4, 2025 Page 2 of 3 Resolution No. PC2025-14
a) Reduce negative impacts on adjacent properties, reduce the unnecessary destruction of the environment and ground cover to avoid the creation of hazardous conditions and drainage problems;
b) Avoid monotonous and otherwise nonaesthetic development injurious to the overall community;
c) Provide a [means] to encourage full development of streets servicing the properties; d) Assures full installation of all public utilities necessary to serve such properties; and e) Is consistent with the applicable zoning, parking and landscaping, fencing, signage, street, sidewalk and public services requirements.

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the proposed variance requests satisfy the Variance Permit Review requirements (CCMC §§ 17.56.010 (A through E)), in that the requests meet:
a) That there are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances of conditions applicable to the property involved (CCMC 17.56.010(A));
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 (CCMC 17.56.010(B)); 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 (CCMC 17.56.010(C));
d) The granting of such variances will not adversely affect the general plan for Crescent City (CCMC 17.56.010(D));
e) That a public hearing wherein the applicant is heard and in which he substantiates all of the conditions cited above (CCMC 17.56.010(E)); 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 (CCMC 17.56.010(F)).

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the proposed project is determined to be categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Class 3 § 15303(b) (New Construction of Small Structures), Class 5 § 15305(a) (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations), and Class 32 § 15332 (In-fill Development) of the CEQA Guidelines, in that the proposed project:
a) Is located within City limits and is surrounded by existing development; b) Consists of four dwelling unit multi-family residential structure; c) Is considered a minor alternation to setback limitations with a slope less than 20% and does not result in any changes to residential use or exceed density; d) Requests variances for minor side and rear yard setbacks which does not result in a new parcel;
e) Is consistent with the Crescent City General Plan’s Multi-Family Residential 15-30- du per acre (MF 15-30) land use designation and is consistent with the Crescent City’s High-Density Residential District (R-3) Zoning Code (with a Variance Permit); f) Is located in the City of Crescent City, is approximately 0.12 acres, and is located adjacent to existing commercial uses;
VARIANCE PERMIT (APPLICATION VAR25-01)
For reduced setbacks
Resolution No. PC2025-14 Page 3 of 3 December 4, 2025
g) Is located on a site which has had past disturbances, contains existing development, and is surrounded by paved surfaces containing no habitat for rare, threatened, or endangered species;
h) Is within a developed commercial area that already services commercial use and has a limited potential to result in significant traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality impacts; and
i) Is surrounded by and is already adequately served by utilities and public services.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Crescent City that the Variance Permit (Application VAR25-01) granting Battery Point Group’s request for reduced setbacks at the address above be approved subject to the Conditions of Approval (Attachment B):

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Crescent City held on this 4th day of December 2025, by the following polled vote.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:
_______________________________
Steve Shamblin, Chairperson
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Heather Welton, Community Development Specialist

THIS PAGE WAS LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
Ardette Esselstrom
210 Sea View Circle
Crescent City, CA 95531
[email protected]
707-951-0019
November 23, 2025
City of Crescent City Planning Commission
Community Development Dept. – Planning & Zoning
377 J Street
Crescent City, CA 95531
Re: Formal Objection to Requested Rear Yard Setback Variance, 10 Foot Standard Reduced to 4 Feet, for Proposed Two-Story Fourplex at 511 8th Street, APN 118-230-003 Dear Planning Commissioners,
I am writing to formally object to the requested variance to reduce the legally mandated rear yard ten (10) foot setback to four (4) feet for the proposed two-story fourplex development located at 511 8th Street which is adjacent to my property located at 537 8th Street.

My property is a single-family home, and this requested variance would create significant and unreasonable negative impacts on the resident’s privacy, safety, and quality of life. The existing setback standards in Crescent City are intended to ensure compatibility between development and to protect neighboring properties from undue impacts related to building mass, height, fire risk, and privacy.

A two-story multi-unit structure built only four feet from my property line is not compatible with a single-story, single family house next door and undermines the purpose of the zoning ordinance.

1. Loss of Privacy
The reduced setback would eliminate reasonable privacy by creating direct sightlines from second-story windows into the home and backyard.

2. Light and Air Impacts
A two-story, multi-unit structure so close to the property line would significantly block natural light and airflow to the home and yard, creating a negative “wall” effect.

3. Fire and Life Safety Risks
The reduced separation between structures increases fire risk and limits emergency access. The current setback standards exist in part to provide adequate space between buildings for fire protection and public safety.

4. Negative Impact on Property Value
Placing a dense, two-story multi-family structure so close to my single-family home will negatively affect my property value.

5. Lack of True Hardship
A variance is intended for cases of genuine hardship related to parcel shape, topography, or unique physical constraints—not for the convenience of a developer or to maximize project density or profit. No such hardship appears to exist that would justify cutting the required setback by 60%.

I respectfully request that the Planning Commission deny the requested variance and require the applicant to comply with the standard ten (10) foot setback as required by Crescent City Municipal Code.

Please include this letter in the official public record for this project. I also request to be notified of any public hearings or decisions regarding this application.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,
Ardette Esselstrom
CC: Shawna Hyatt, Commissioner
Kris DeCossio, Commissioner
Raymond Walp, Commissioner
Steve Shamblin, Commissioner
Eric Weir, City Manager
Robin Altman, City Clerk

CITY OF CRESCENT CITY

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT - PLANNING & ZONING
(Address) 377 J Street, Crescent City, CA 95531 (Phone) 707-464-9506 Incorporated April 13, 1854 (Website) www. crescentcitv. ora

PLANNING & ZONING REFERRAL FORM
Variance Permit - Application VAR25-01
The Department provides the following review regarding the submitted Variance Permit (Application VAR25-01) to request a reduction in setbacks for a proposed 4-plex multi family residential development located at 511 8th Street (APN 118-230-003):
□ ON HOLD □Approved □ DENIED
DEPARTMENT COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, CONCERNS, and/or CONDITIONS:

Fire has some concerns with this request. Please find my explanation below. In navigating around established laws and requirementsfor setbacks in residential scenarios, one must consider the perspective of responders in times of emergency.

1. Limited setback distance creates diminished access to critical areas of residential structures. These critical areas are often second story bedroom windows which also serve as required egress in case of a fire, In upper floor residentialfires, stairwells or primary means of egress are often cut off for residents trying to evacuate.

2. Although the proposed project will be sprinkled, there remains an increase to the westerly exposure in fire conditions upon the residence to the east border boundary. Recommended solution: to increase requested setback variance to 5 or 7 feet. This will allow a fully equipped responder with fire hose or ladders to more safely navigate fire conditions or effect a victim rescue from upper floors of the structure. 3. Setting frequent precedence that becomes the norm for future residential building projects with little to no lot line setbacks. Recommended solution: consider at minimum, to make reasonable accommodation for responders access by considering 5-7' request. Additionally, if required setbacks are not kept, AHJ (fire marshal) can work with contractorsto increase the fire/building code construction materials to be greater than 1 hour construction (including windows). This will further protect existing exposures if the setback variance is granted. It seems that changes to parking design or slightly less building square footage can remedy this variance request.

PROVIDED BY THE CITY OF CRESCENT CITY:
3 Kevin Carey, Fire Chief. Fire and Rescue
□ Dan Minges, Building Inspector, Building Department
□ David Yeager, Public Works Director, Public Works Department □ Richard Griffin, Chief of Police, Police Department
□ Other;
Signature: z. Date: u
VAR25-01 REF Page 1 of 1 November 4, 2025

Chapter 17.56 VARIANCES
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:
(Prior code § 30-502)
Upon the filing of a written application for a variance by a property owner or by a lessee with the consent of the owner, the planning commission shall give notice to properties which are immediately adjacent and opposite from the property in question. Such notice shall give intention to consider at a public hearing the granting of the variance. Upon the filing of an application for variance the secretary of the commission shall either place the matter on the agenda for consideration by the commission at a subsequent meeting, then give notice by mail of the time, place and purpose thereof to the applicant as well as to the public in general. No more than twenty days following the termination of the public hearing on a variance the planning commission shall announce its findings by a formal report, and such report shall recite among other things the facts and reasons which, in its opinion, made the granting or denial of the variance necessary to carry out the provisions and general purpose of this chapter, and shall order that the variance be granted or denied, and if such report orders that the variance be granted it shall also recite such conditions and limitations as it may impose. The formal report of the planning commission announcing its findings and orders after a hearing on an application for variance shall become a permanent record in the files of the planning commission. No later than ten days following the rendering of a decision ordering that a variance be granted or denied a copy of the report shall be mailed to the applicant and any other person requesting such report.
(Prior code § 30-502.1)
The order of the planning commission in granting or denying a variance shall become final and effective ten days after the rendering of its report granting or denying the variance unless within such ten day period an appeal in writing is filed with the council by any person dissatisfied with the decision of the planning commission. The filing of such appeal within such limit shall stay the effective date of the order of the planning commission until such time as the council has acted on the appeal.
(Prior code § 30-502.2)
(Prior code § 30-502.3)
§ 17.56.010 Purpose.

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.
§ 17.56.020 Application—Notice and hearing.
§ 17.56.030 Appeal.
§ 17.56.040 Council action—Granting or denial.

A. Upon request of a written appeal filed with the council as provided herein, the planning commission shall transmit to the council the planning commission's complete record of the case. The city council shall, within a period not to exceed forty days following receipt of the written appeal, conduct a duly advertised public hearing, public notice of which shall be given as provided in Section 17.58.040.

B. The council shall announce its findings and decision by formal resolution not more than forty days following the termination of proceedings of the hearing. Such resolution shall recite among other things the facts and reasons which, in the opinion of the council, make the granting or denial of the variance necessary to carry out the general purpose of this chapter and shall order that the variance be granted or denied or modified subject to such conditions or limitations that it may impose.
§ 17.56.050 Copies of resolution for applicant and commission. 1/8/26, 11:41 AM Crescent City, CA VARIANCES
https://ecode360.com/44243242 1/2
Not later than ten days following the adoption of a resolution ordering that a variance be granted or denied, a copy of such resolution shall be mailed to the applicant and any other parties requesting notice of the action and one copy shall be attached to the planning commission's file on the case and such file returned to the planning commission for permanent filing.
(Prior code § 30-502.4)
1/8/26, 11:41 AM Crescent City, CA VARIANCES
https://ecode360.com/44243242 2/2
CRESCENT CITY RESOLUTION NO. 2026-02 Page | 1
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-02

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CRESCENT CITY APPROVING VARIANCE PERMIT (APPLICATION VAR25-01) FOR DEVELOPMENT AT 511 8TH STREET (APN 118-230-003)
WHEREAS, Battery Point Group LLC (with Elk Creek Buildings / Red Sky Inc.) submitted a Variance Permit Application (VAR25-01) to request a reduction in in the rear yard and exterior side yard setbacks for a proposed 4-plex multi-family residential development located at 511 8th Street (APN 118-230-003);
WHEREAS, the application also requested a parking waiver for an additional driveway to back over the sidewalk (a total 4 rather than the 3 that are allowed by the Zoning Code); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered and approved the application on December 4, 2025 during a duly noticed public hearing; and WHEREAS, the decision of the Planning Commission was timely appealed by a member of the public who objected to the variance application at the public hearing; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on January 14, 2026 wherein the Council heard evidence and testimony submitted by the applicant, the appellant, the public and a presentation from staff; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the evidence and hearing and deliberated on the matter.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Crescent City that:

1. FINDINGS. The City Council makes the following findings:

1.1 General Plan Consistency. The proposed project is consistent with the Crescent City General Plan’s MF 15-30 (Multi-Family Residential 15-30-du per acre) land use designation, in that the proposed project:

1.1.1 Is categorized as “townhouses (row houses)” with “Residential densities range from a minimum of 15 to a maximum of 30 dwelling units per acre” within the MF 15-30 which equates to a minimum of 2 and a maximum of 4 dwelling units for the parcel;

1.1.2 “Provides for high density residential development within the urban boundary” within the MF 15-30 by constructing the maximum allowable units (4) on the parcel; and

1.1.3 Is supported by the General Plan Goal 1.F - “To provide adequate land in a range of residential densities to accommodate the housing needs of all income groups expected to reside in Crescent City, while CRESCENT CITY RESOLUTION NO. 2026-02 Page | 2
ensuring a high quality of residential development” by making use of a vacant parcel zone high density residential and filling a local need for market rate housing (no income restrictions); and

1.1.4 Is supported by General Plan Policy 1.A.2. - “The City shall encourage infill development that makes efficient use of existing public infrastructure and is compatible with existing development” because the vacant parcel is within a developed area of town and has ready access to public utilities and infrastructure.

1.1.5 Is supported by General Plan Policy 1.A.3. - “The City shall encourage project sites to be designed to increase the convenience, safety, and comfort of people using public transportation, walking, or cycling” because this project is centrally located with access to grocery stores, retail stores, restaurants, entertainment, recreation and public services by way of walking, biking, or taking public transportation.

1.1.6 Is supported by General Plan Policy 1.F.2. - “The City shall ensure that infill development (either new or rehabilitated residential structures) is compatible with the overall established character of residential neighborhoods” as this neighborhood is has several multi-family developments.

1.1.7 Is supported by General Plan Policy 1.F.3. - “The City shall encourage higher residential densities at locations where convenient access and adequate facilities, including parks and open space, are readily available” as Peterson Park is approximately one block from the project.

1.1.8 Is supported by General Plan Policy 1.J.5. – “The City shall ensure that all new developments in the Crescent City area be of quality design and provide an adequate level of amenities” because the applicant has submitted renderings and a list of quality design materials (including hardy concrete siding) consistent with some of the contractor’s previous projects.

1.1.9 Is supported by the Housing Element policy HP-1.2. - “Encourage compatible multi-family developments on feasible lots in the Moderate Density (R-2), High Density Residential (R-3), ResidentialProfessional (RP), Downtown Business (C-1), General Commercial (C-2), and Commercial Waterfront (C-W) zones by adhering to minimum density standards and streamlining the application review CRESCENT CITY RESOLUTION NO. 2026-02 Page | 3
process” because this project exceeds the minimum density standards.

1.2 Zoning Code Consistency. The proposed project (with a Variance Permit) is consistent with the Crescent City’s High-Density Residential District (R-3) Zoning Code, in that the proposed project:

1.2.1 Is not located within the Coastal Zone and is not appealable to the Coastal Commission;

1.2.2 Is consistent with the “Dwelling groups consisting of one-family, two-family, or multiple-family dwellings” (CCMC § 17.16.020(A)) as the proposed project is a multi-family dwelling;

1.2.3 “Provides for high density concentrations of dwelling units together with specific ancillary and complementary uses” (CCMC §

17.16.010(A)) as the proposed project includes the maximum density of dwelling units; and

1.2.4 Is subject to all zoning regulations (CCMC § 17.16.010(B)).

1.3 Variance Requirements. The proposed variance requests satisfy the Variance Permit Review requirements (CCMC §§ 17.56.010 (A through E)), as follows:

1.3.1 There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved (CCMC 17.56.010(A)) because the shape and small size of the parcel make it difficult to design functional livings space, parking and required setbacks simultaneously while also achieving the number of dwelling units allowed by its zoning designation;

1.3.2 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 (CCMC 17.56.010(B)) because multiple comparable properties in the vicinity (e.g., multi-family developments at 6th & D Streets and 5th & C Streets) have received similar variances for reduced setbacks and parking configurations without reports of negative impacts;

1.3.3 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 (CCMC 17.56.010(C)) because (1) the setback reductions will maintain adequate open space, privacy, and visual harmony with surrounding structures, (2) the parking variance is necessary because backing over the sidewalk is the only feasible parking configuration for a lot of his size CRESCENT CITY RESOLUTION NO. 2026-02 Page | 4
and shape, and (3) similar conditions exist throughout the neighborhood and have functioned safety, and (4) the proposed backing area is located on E Street, a low-traffic road;

1.3.4 The granting of such variances will not adversely affect the general plan for Crescent City (CCMC 17.56.010(D)) because the proposed project is consistent with the general plan as stated in Section 1.1; and

1.3.5 A public hearing wherein the applicant is heard and in which he substantiated all of the conditions cited above (CCMC 17.56.010(E)) was held January 14, 2026.

1.4 CEQA Determination. The proposed project is determined to be categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under the following CEQA Guidelines:

1.4.1 Class 3 § 15303(b) (New Construction of Small Structures) in that the proposed project is (1) within an urbanized area (within the city limits and surrounded by existing development); and (2) a multifamily residential structure totaling no more than six dwelling units (project is 4 dwelling units).

1.4.2 Class 5 § 15305(a) (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations) in that the proposed project 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” because the setback limitations with a slope less than 20% does not result in any changes to residential use or exceed density; and “minor side yard and setback variances not resulting in the creation of any new parcel” because the requested variances are for minor side and rear yard setbacks and a parking waiver, none of which will result in a new parcel.

1.4.3 Class 32 § 15332 (In-fill Development) in that the proposed project:
a. Is consistent with the Crescent City General Plan’s Multi-Family Residential 15-30-du per acre (MF 15-30) land use designation and is consistent with the Crescent City’s High-Density Residential District (R-3) Zoning Code (with a Variance Permit) as stated in Sections 1.1 and 1.2;
b. Is located in the City of Crescent City, is approximately 0.12 acres, and is located adjacent to existing commercial uses; c. Is located on a site which has had past disturbances, contains existing development, and is surrounded by paved surfaces CRESCENT CITY RESOLUTION NO. 2026-02 Page | 5
containing no habitat for rare, threatened, or endangered species;
d. Is within a developed commercial area that already services commercial use and the four dwelling unit multi-family
residential structure has a limited potential to result in significant traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality impacts; e. Is surrounded by and is already adequately served by utilities and public services, including water, sewer and power;
f. Qualifies as a Class 3 exemption as stated in Section 1.4.1; and g. Qualifies as a Class 5 exemption as stated in Section 1.4.2.

2. VARIANCE APPROVAL. Variance Permit (Application VAR25-01) for development at 511 8th Street (APN 118-230-003) is approved as follows:

2.1 Rear yard setback is reduced to 5 ft (minimum).

2.2 Exterior side yard setback is reduced to 8 ft 4 in (minimum).

2.3 One additional driveway is permitted to back over the sidewalk (4 total).

2.4 Subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Crescent City held on this 14th day of January 2026, by the following polled vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:
_______________________________
Isaiah Wright, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Robin Altman, City Clerk
CRESCENT CITY RESOLUTION NO. 2026-02 Page | 6

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Variance Permit – Application VAR25-01
Parcel: 511 8th Street (APN 118-230-003), Crescent City, CA Zoning: R-3 (High-Density Residential)
Owner: Battery Point Group LLC
Variance(s) Granted:

1. Rear yard setback reduced to 5ft (minimum).

2. Exterior side yard setback reduced to 8ft 4 in (minimum).

3. One additional driveway is permitted to back over the sidewalk (4 total).

Variances are subject to the following conditions:

1. Zoning. The applicant shall be required to maintain compliance with all requirements of the City’s Municipal Code including, but not limited to, Chapter 17.16 (R-3 HighDensity Residential District).

2. Variance. The approved project shall be limited according to the approved variance (VAR25-01) by the City Council.

3. Site Plan & Architectural Design. The approved project shall be constructed according to the approved site plan & architectural design. a. Expiration. A site plan or architectural design approval shall lapse and shall become void one year following the date on which approval by the committee, planning commission or city council became effective unless prior to the expiration of one year a building permit is issued by the building official, and the construction is commenced and diligently pursued toward completion on the site or structures which were the subject of the site plan or architectural design approval (CCMC §17.46.090(A)).
b. Extension. Approval may be extended for an additional period for periods of one year upon written application to the planning commission before expiration of the first approval (CCMC §17.46.090(B)).
c. Transfer. A site plan or architectural design approved pursuant to the provisions of chapter 17.46 shall run with the land and shall continue to be valid upon the change of ownership of the site which was the subject of the site plan or architectural design approval, subject to the provisions of Section

17.46.090 (CCMC §17.46.100).
d. Revisions. Any minor deviations from approved plans may be approved by the Director of the Community Development Department.

CRESCENT CITY RESOLUTION NO. 2026-02 Page | 7

7. Building Department. The applicant shall comply with permit requirements of the City of Crescent City’s Building Department.
a. Building Permit. Before a building permit shall be issued for any building or structure proposed as part of an approved site plan or architectural design, the building official shall determine that the proposed building location facilities and improvements are in conformity with the plans and conditions approved by the Planning Commission (CCMC §17.46.080(A)). b. Issuance. The Building Permit shall not be issued until the effective date of this approval.
c. Certificate of Occupancy. Before a building may be occupied the building official shall certify that the site or structure has been developed in conformity with the plans and conditions approved in this chapter (CCMC §17.46.080(B)). ***

Crescent City City CouncilJanuary 14, 2026

Crescent City City Council
January 14, 2026