Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 06101986 - T.8 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA T.8 Adopted this Order on June 10 , 1986 , by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Fanden, McPeak , Torlakson, Powers NOES: None ABSENT: Supervisor Schroder ABSTAIN: None -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- SUBJECT: Hearing on appeal of Kenneth Hempel from the decision of the Board of Appeals sustaining the decision of the Zoning Administrator concerning height limitations on Lots 11 & 12, Condition 21 , Subdivision 5425 , Kensington/E1 Cerrito area. This being the time for hearing on the appeal of Kenneth Hempel (appellant) from the decision of the Board of Appeals sustaining the decision of the Zoning Administrator concerning height limitations on Lots 11 & 12 of Subdivision 5425 , Condition No. 21 , T.H. Lam & San Francisco Land Company (applicant & owner) , Kensington/E1 Cerrito area. Harvey Bragdon, Acting Director of Community Development , described the property site and gave a brief history of the appeal from the height limitation set by the Zoning Administrator and upheld by the Board of Appeals at 721 feet . Pictures showing the views with the limit set at 717 , 719 , and 721 feet were presented to the Board. Mr. Bragdon commented that the appellant felt that 717 feet rather than 721 feet would be an acceptable intrusion on his view. The Chairman opened the Public Hearing. Mark Stilwell, 345 California Street, San Francisco, attorney for Mr. T.H. Lam & San Francisco Land Company, gave a brief history of the project concerning Lot 11 and commented that Mr. Lam felt he had done everything requested of him by the Planning Commission to build a house on Lot 11 . He stated that Mr. Lam had received his original permit for a house at 729 feet and this was reduced to 727 feet and then to 721 feet by the Zoning Administrator. He commented that all Mr. Lam wants to do is be able to use the existing grade which is a very gently sloping lot from front to back and put up a normal one story house with a normal amount of grading, taking care to do what he can to minimize the impact on Mr. Hempel ' s view, but that he felt that the 721 foot much less the 717 foot limitation was unreasonable. Kenneth Hempel, 3 Arlington Avenue, Kensington, appellant, gave a brief history of the project and of the character of the neighborhood. He felt that he and his neighbors should be able to rely on the decision of the Planning Commission in 1979 with the intent to protect the marine views. He commented about the integrity of the planning process. He asked the Board to give him the intent of the Planning Commission decision back in 1979 which was view protection. He felt that the Board of Appeals did not have all the facts when their decision was made. He wished to have his . marine view from his living room protected and felt this could be done by setting the height limitation at 717 feet . Mr. Bart Jones, architect, Kensington, representing the Kensington Improvement Club, who had reviewed the project, past hearing transcripts, application data, site visits , and site view relationships, commented that a house could be built at 717 feet with care and site position. He felt that a site specific house should be considered by the developer. Nicholas J. Perella, 3 Highland Boulevard, Kensington, commented on the character of the area and the concern of the resi- dents of the area relative to preserving of the views . He called attention to the fact that Kensington has a Tree Ordinance and the care taken by the people in the area to do landscaping to preserve the views. Mark Stilwell spoke in rebuttal. He commented on the ori- ginal intent of the Planning Commission decision in 1979 and felt that it eliminated restrictions on Lots 11 and 12 not created them. He stated that he had not seen the Addendum to Conditions until the appeal was made before the Planning Commission. He felt that the boundaries of Lot 11 could not be adjusted as had been suggested due to the fact that Lot 12 had already been sold. He commented that Mr. Lam was willing to live with reasonable height restriction but did not feel that what had been suggested by Mr. Hempel or the 721 foot height restriction even with a site specific house would be possible. The Chairman closed the public hearing. Supervisor Powers recommended that this matter be placed on the determination calendar for June 17 , 1986 and allow any Board members to go out to the site and look at the property so that the issues regarding the configurations and the neighborhood and heights could be viewed. IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the recommendation of Supervisor Powers is APPROVED and the hearing on the appeal of Kenneth Hempel is closed and decision on the matter is deferred to June 17 , 1986 on the determination calendar. hereby certlty that thin is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered.or the miruteo of the Board of Supervisors On the date shown. ATTESTED: AAAMJM IQ ( {(6 PHIL BAT.,, iaLart, cis*of the E.omd of Supervisors and County Administrator By O , Deputy cc: County Administrator Community Development County Counsel Applicant & Owner Appellant