Minutes 1995 0403 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Minutes - San Leandro City Council Meeting - April 3, 1995 Page - 10 - 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. Continued from the March 20, 1995, City Council Meeting. This being the time and place for the Public Hearing on the above matter, Steve Emslie, Planning Manager, presented the staff report. He reviewed the Variances granted in the area since 1969. He described how those were different from the current request, because they involved corner lots, property adjacent to higher-density land uses, or different types of structures such as patio covers. He said all the Variances were for structures for which permits were obtained before they were built. Council Member Polvorosa said some of the previous Variances were for 90' -deep properties; Mr. Emslie said those Variances would probably not be granted today. Council Member Kerr said he did not see any difference between the Shih Application and the Variances which were previously granted, except that permits were obtained prior to construction. Council Member Kerr asked if Mr. Emslie knew of Building Code violations in the Shih building. Mr. Emslie said there is some evidence that there may be violations, such as the use of plastic pipe. Staff presented a video tape of the subject property and responded to Council questions. Mr. Emslie said the structure has not been inspected for Building Code issues, pending the outcome of the Appeal . He confirmed that, under the Zoning Code, a 30' -tall structure could be constructed to within 10' of the rear property line, with architectural review and no Variance. Council Member Kerr said the occupants on both sides and across the street have no objections, and the rear property owner only objected to selling 5' of his property to Mrs. Shih. In response to questions, Mr. Emslie discussed shadows cast on the property to the rear and reviewed the site plan. Council Member Kerr said he did not agree the Zoning Code required that Variances meet all three standards to be granted. He said this is an exceptional or unusual circumstance because, if the Variance is not granted, the addition must be demolished. He said the important issue is that it meets all Building Codes. He did not think it cuts out anyone's light or ventilation, and it is not detrimental to the neighbors. He said the reasons for granting other Variances were no better than in this case, and he does not see much difference. He said staff could come up with reasons for justifying the Variance with Conditions that it meet all Codes, which may require Mrs. Shih to open up the building, which she has agreed to do. He recommended that the Appeal be granted with Conditions.