Minutes 1995 0320 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Minutes - San Leandro City Council Meeting - March 20, 1995 Page - 7 - 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Matter of Appeal by R. Shih of the Board of Zoning Adjustments' Denial of V-94-5; Variance; to Reduce the Required Rear Yard Setback from 10 Feet to 5 Feet to Retain an Existing Addition, Which Includes a Family Room, Bedroom/Study and Bathroom; 14289 Santiago Road; Assessor's Parcel Number 80G-928-15; R. Shih; RS (Residential Single-Family) District. This being the time and place for the Public Hearing on the above matter, Elmer Penaranda, Associate Engineer, presented the staff report. He said the addition was constructed with no building permits or City inspections. The addition was constructed to within five feet of the rear property line, and a 10-foot rear setback is required ; therefore, the homeowner applied for a Variance, which was denied by the Board of Zoning Adjustments. The property owners attempted to buy five feet from the property owners to the rear but were unsuccessful . In response to Council questions, Mr. Penaranda said there is no pattern of other buildings within the 10-foot rear setback in the area. Council Member Myers said his house is approximately 365 feet from the subject property. The City Attorney requested a brief recess to discuss this matter with Council Member Myers. After discussion, Council Member Myers said he felt he should abstain. The City Attorney explained State law prohibits a Council Member from acting upon or participating in a Hearing if the subject property is within 300 feet of the Member's property. If the subject property is 300 to 1000 feet, the Council Member may abstain, depending upon whether the action may affect the value of his own property. In this case, there would be no way of determining if the City Council 's action could affect the value of Council Member Myers' property. Therefore, the City Attorney suggested that he abstain from participation in the Hearing. In response to Council questions, staff said they had researched City records and found no evidence of five-foot setbacks that had been granted. Council Member Kerr asked what detrimental impact the addition has on privacy and availability of light for the adjacent properties, as stated in the staff report. He said the house to the rear is more than 30 feet away. Mr. Penaranda explained that windows on the addition look into the adjacent yard, and the gabled roof casts a shadow on the adjacent property. Council Member Kerr requested an explanation of how the addition could create over-crowding on the lot. He also said the windows are below the fence height. Steve Emslie, Planning Manager, explained the difference between rear- yard vs. sideyard-setback requirements, in response to Council comments. He said the Board of Zoning Adjustments felt more open space is required in a rear yard because there is more outdoor activity there.