Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 02281995 - H.5 • .. r•��E SE.L-oma •-"f Contra TO: . BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Costa o FROM: HARVEY E. BRAGDON ; _ %jaiiidpg County , b DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: February 7 , 1995 SUBJECT: Appeal of Robert Price from the Administrative Decision of the Community Development Department Relative to Proposed Storage Facility, Blair Residence, 1449 Murwood Drive, Walnut Creek SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that the Board of Supervisors take one of the following actions: 1. Deny the appeal of Robert Price on behalf of the Walnut Knolls ; Homeowners Association and allow construction of the structure as approved by the Community Development Department. 2 . Grant the appeal of Robert Price on behalf of the Walnut Knolls Homeowners Association and over-rule the decision of the Community Development Department to approve the accessory. structure and: a. Grant approval for the 68 ft. by 32 ft. structure originally approved by the Community Development Department or b. Limit size of accessory structures to (500 sq. ft. ) (1, 000 sq. ft. ) (1, 500 sq. ft. ) and C. Shift . the structures to at least 20 ft. away from the property line to assure protection of the existing trees, and d. Limit the height of the structure to 25 ft. FISCAL IMPACT None. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITT E APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S) : ACTION OF BOARD ON ,5- APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER GRANTED the appeal of Robert rice on behalf of the Walnut Knolls Homeowners Association, and DIRECTED staff to consider the guidelines presented by Mr. Price for an appropriate accessory structure at 1449 Murwood Drive,Walnut Creek. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT .THIS IS A UNANIMOUS (ABSENT TRUE AND- CORRECT COPY OF AN AYES: } NOES: - ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. Contact:Mary Fleming - 646-2031 Orig: Community Development Department ATTESTEDS- cc: PHIL BAT ELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BY DEPUTY 2 . BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION The County Zoning Ordinance allows "a detached single family dwelling unit on each lot and the accessory structures and uses normally auxiliary to it" in the single family residential zoning districts. The ordinance defines an Accessory Building as "a subordinate building the use of which is incidental to that of a main building on the same lot. " Mr. & Mrs. Jim Blair own an approximately two acre parcel in the Walnut Creek area adjacent to a school to the south, the Broadway Avenue extension to the west and R-20 residential to the north and east. The site is also zoned R-20 (Single Family Residential) . In January of 1993 the Blairs requested permission to place two storage structures on their two acre parcel . One structure was described as 12 ft. by 56 ft. and was determined to be allowable if properly finished and placed on a foundation. It was described by the Blairs as a place for Mrs. Blair to keep her hobby supplies. The second structure was to be,.,built around storage containers and was approved as a 68 ft. by 32 ft. structure. This structure was to provide storage space for the Blair' s many vehicles, boats, equipment and other personal belongings. In August of 1994 the Blairs revised their request and asked for a larger structure because of the lack of availability of the smaller containers. Staff agreed to allow the structure to increase to 80 ft. in length to accommodate two 40 ft. containers. The height was limited to 16 ft. In September of 1994 they requested another increase in size to 116 ft. by 36 ft. and an increase in height from 16 ft. to 18 ft. 8 inches. This request was denied. Robert Price on behalf of the Walnut Knolls Owners Association has appealed the staff's approval of the structure. Sometime during this process the property owner placed storage containers on the site. Storage containers are not allowed on residentially zoned property. A zoning investigation was initiated as a result of their placement and is currently on hold pending issuance of a building permit for the permanent structure. The Robert Price appeal of the Community Development Department decision is based on several factors: 1. Structure is too large to qualify as an accessory building in R-20 residential zoning. The accessory structures, existing and proposed, on the subject property are much larger than would generally be allowed on a standard R-20 parcel. The parcel is four times larger than R-20 minimums. The portion of the property where the structures are located or proposed are to the south and west and away from other residential structures. There is a row of smaller trees along the western property line which, if protected, provide some visual buffering. As can be seen from the above description of events, the property owner originally requested a structure which would have occupied the majority of the west property line (approximately 222 feet by 32 feet or 7 , 104 sq. ft. ) . This was not allowed but a smaller structure (approximately 68 ft. by 32 ft. or 2 , 176 sq. ft. ) was approved. The size, though larger, was approved based on the size of available storage containers and size of the parcel. After the initial approval the applicant requested larger and larger structures. The size currently approved is 34 ft. by 82 ft. or 2 , 788 sq. ft. The structure is planned to be two stories tall. ,f I 3 . 2 . Sideyard setback of 3 ft. is not acceptable, and violates the R-20 zoning ordinance. The zoning ordinance allows a sideyard setback of 3 feet for an accessory structure if it is setback at least 65 ft. from the front property line. The proposed structure meets this requirement. A Community Development Department requirement that the existing trees be protected may result in a need to shift the structure easterly to avoid the tree roots and crown. The property owner has not yet indicated how he will assure protection of the trees. The location of the structure appears to be in conflict with the trees. 3. A number of trees along the sideyard property line will be damaged or destroyed due to the proximity• of said structure. Although it is noted on their building plans that trees are to be saved Community Development Department has not been provided with any information to demonstrate how that will be accomplished. 4 . Sideyard adjoins a main entrance drive to Murwood Elementary School serving all of the Walnut Knolls Area, Santa Rita HOA and the Creekside Apartment development. This building, at this size, will "loom", overpower, and create a tunnel or alley effect. Totally unnecessary on a 2-acre parcel. There will be somewhat of a "tunnel" effect with the structure on one side and a soundwall on the other. The trees, if successfully saved, will help soften this effect. BDIX/Blair.MF Date: ;2, REQUEST To SPEAK{ FORM (Two [2] Minute Limit) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. l Name [ ` r Phone: _ 15"o Address• JY_ P1 JA�"� e '"'`�� City: " I am speaking for: [ ] Myself OR ❑ Organization: NAME OF ORGANIZATION CHECK ONE: ❑ I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: ® General ❑ For ❑ Against ❑ I wish to speak on the subject of: ❑ I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider: