Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Specific Use Permit topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission denies request to allow duplex at 5450 Concord Road after neighbors oppose conversion from four units
Summary
A specific-use permit to allow a duplex at 5450 Concord Road—proposed to reduce an existing four-unit building to two units—was denied after neighbors raised safety, parking, and utility concerns and commissioners voted to deny the request.
A request for a specific-use permit to allow a duplex at 5450 Concord Road was denied at the joint Planning Commission and City Council meeting on Jan. 27 after public opposition and questions about permits, safety and utilities.
Staff reported that a stop-work order was issued in July 2024 when inspections showed repairs had proceeded without appropriate permits and the single-family structure had been converted into four dwelling units. "If approved, this request will allow the property owner to reduce the number of dwelling units from 4 to 2, which would bring the property into compliance with the city's zoning regulations," staff told the commission when presenting the case. Staff recommended approval with three conditions: obtain all necessary permits and complete required city inspections; place no permanent structures in the easement property; and comply with all applicable fire and building code requirements.
The applicant's on-site contractor, Eleuterio Baran, said he pulled permits for exterior repairs he performed but that interior alterations predated his work. "All we're trying to do is just get it back to where the new owners can, you know, rent the property out," Baran said. He told the commission he had pulled permits for the siding, roof and exterior work and would follow the building-official process for interior compliance.
Neighbors spoke in opposition. Francis Bowman, who lives across the street, said the house had been built as a single-family home and described changes and on-site activity. "I am a taxpayer, and I have a home, and I want my home and my community safe," Bowman told the commission, citing concerns about noise, parking and fire risk. Another nearby resident, Jonathan Finch, said he shares a transformer with the property and reported dimming lights when air conditioners run; Finch asked whether the building had a certificate of occupancy.
Commissioners and council members questioned how the conversion from four units to two would be accomplished and whether safe egress and code-compliant plans were in place. The applicant said interior demising and reconfiguration would be addressed through the permitting process and building-official review, but no drawing was available at the hearing.
Two motions to approve the specific-use permit were made but each failed for lack of a second. A subsequent motion to deny the request carried on a voice vote; the chair recorded the outcome. Staff said a denial leaves the property eligible to be used as a single-family home by right under current zoning, and applicants may return with a different application should they choose to pursue that route.
The commission's action stops the requested zoning exception. If the owner or contractor seeks another approval, they must submit plans and permits and proceed through the building-official review process.
