Fortuna Planning Commission approves 26-foot accessory structure and ADU on Elizabeth Parkes Way, adds screening condition

The Fortuna Planning Commission on Oct. 14 approved Resolution PD-2025-3139, granting a conditional use permit for a 1,728-square-foot detached accessory structure with a 1,162-square-foot, two-bedroom, two-bath accessory dwelling unit (ADU) at a property on Elizabeth Parkes Way. The structure’s proposed height is 26 feet, exceeding the 15-foot limit for accessory buildings in the parcel’s residential estates (RE-20) zone. The commission approved the resolution 4-1 and added a condition requiring screen junipers to be planted “as soon as” occupancy is available.

The project, presented by Senior Planner Katie, applies to a 1.22-acre parcel in the RE-20 zone with a B-4 overlay. Staff said the primary residence on the parcel is 2,172 square feet with an attached 747-square-foot garage. The proposal places the new detached structure in the northwest corner of the lot, includes two new paved parking spaces accessed from the existing driveway, and uses the ADU rules to allow a reduced side setback (the applicant proposes an approximately 8-foot setback; ADU rules can allow a 4-foot setback in some cases).

Katie told the commission the ADU conforms to zoning size limits for accessory dwelling units (1,200 sq. ft. maximum) and will require an administrative ADU permit at building permit stage. She cited Fortuna Municipal Code sections on the residential estates district and height regulations and said the project qualifies for CEQA exemptions under Class 3 (new small structures) and Class 32 (infill projects).

Designer Donald Cleek described the design choices and trade-offs. “We did attempt a one-story design to work within the height limitations, and it wasn’t getting the square footage that the owner was hoping to get,” Cleek said, describing efforts to lower plate height and match the existing house roofline and materials so the addition would “blend in.” Applicant Dr. Joseph Wartola said the ADU “is gonna be less than 1,200 square feet, 1,162,” and that he plans to install a separate meter and use the unit for a family member rather than short-term rental.

Several nearby residents and three written commenters told the commission they opposed the height, setback and potential privacy and parking impacts. Neighbor Kyle Begum said the proposed height will affect his privacy and view: “It's just being that tall, is really gonna be an eyesore, and it's gonna be an effect, definitely an effect on my ... privacy and my comfort.” Other residents cited recent tree removals along the shared fences, concerns about enforcement of HOA rules, potential for increased on-street parking despite the applicant’s plan for two dedicated spaces, and fire-safety/defensible-space issues given the area’s forested character.

Warren/adjacent landowner Woody Murphy spoke in favor of the project, saying he would be able to look over the building from a higher elevation and had no objection. The applicant told commissioners he plans to plant tall Italian junipers to screen the new structure from adjacent properties and explained that a small shed on the lot is not a concrete slab building but a prefabricated shed.

After public comment and questions, a commissioner moved to approve Resolution PD-2025-3139 with the added condition that screening junipers be planted as soon as practical after occupancy is granted. The motion passed on a roll-call vote: Commissioner Eamon — yes; Commissioner Doris — no; Commissioner Hawley — yes; Vice Chair Nichols — yes; Chair Kind — yes. The commission’s action finds the project consistent with the Fortuna General Plan designation of Residential Very Low and applicable provisions of the Fortuna Municipal Code and approves the use permit subject to the project conditions in staff’s attachment.

Staff noted the ADU still must obtain an administrative ADU permit and building permits, and the Planning Commission may add conditions related to landscaping timing, which the commission did. The applicant said he planned to present the project to his homeowners association after the commission hearing. The building official was present to answer code questions but did not identify additional impediments at the hearing.

The commission’s decision resolves this agenda item; staff noted future meetings and department updates before adjourning.