HomeMy WebLinkAbout86-026 Hall-Fraser VAR
CITY OF DUBLIN
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA STATEMENT/STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date: September 15, 1986
SUBJECT:
Planning Commission
Planning Staff t^tj~ ff
PA 86-026 Hall-Fraser Variance,
11791 Bloomington Way.
TO:
FROM:
GENERAL INFORMATION:
PROJECT:
An application request to vary from required
setback regulations for Accessory Buildings
(Sections 8-60.26 and 8-60.27 of the Dublin
Zoning Ordinance).
APPLICANT/
REPRESENTATIVE:
Keith S. Fraser
P . 0 . Box 511
Livermore, CA 94550
PROPERTY OWNER:
Ralph Hall
11791 Bloomington Way
Dublin, CA 94568
PROPERTY AND
ZONING:
11791 Bloomington Way
Zone: R-I-B-E Single Family Residential
Combining District
APN: 941-2757-87
SURROUNDING LAND
USE & ZONING:
Single Family Residential, R-I-B-E
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION:
Single Family Residential
.9 to 6 units per acre
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS:
Section 8-60.26 (Accessory Building) of the City's Zoning Ordinance
requires detached accessory buildings in an R District to maintain a six (6)
foot minimum setback from any other building on the lot.
Section 8-60.27 states in part that no accessory building in any R
District shall be within six feet of the side line of the front half of an
abutting lot, or occupy the front half of a lot, or either front quarter of an
interior lot abutting two streets, provided, however, that this restriction
shall not require any accessory building to be more than 75 feet distant from
any street lot line.
Section 8-93.0 (Variance) indicates that the strict terms of the Zoning
Ordinance may be varied in specific cases upon affirmative findings of fact
upon each of these three requirements:
ITEM NO. ~
COPIES TO: Applicant
Owner
PA File 86-026
a) That there are special circumstances including size, shape,
topography, location or surroundings, applicable to the property
in the vicinity under the identical zoning classification.
b) That the granting of the application will not constitute a grant
of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other
properties in the vicinity and zone.
c) That the granting of the application will not be detrimental to
persons or property in the neighborhood or to the public welfare.
Section 8-93.1 - .4 establishes the procedures, required action and
effective date for granting or denying a Variance, and indicates the granting
of a Variance shall be subject to conditions, limitations and guarantees.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Categorically Exempt, Class 5
NOTIFICATION:
Public Notice of the September 15, 1986, hearing was
published in The Herald, mailed to adjacent property
owners and posted in public buildings.
BACKGROUND:
On January 9, 1985, the City Building and Zoning Inspector posted a Stop
Work Order at 11791 Bloomington Way for the construction of an accessory
structure within the required sideyard. In a letter dated January 16, 1985,
the City Inspector notified the property owner that the structure was in
violation of the Zoning Ordinance requiring 1) a minimum six-foot setback
between an accessory structure and other structures on a lot, and 2) no
accessory structure may be built within the front half of a lot. The Property
Owner was also informed at the time to either remove the accessory structure
by February 15, 1985, or to move the structure to the rear portion of the lot.
The Property Owner is now requesting a Variance from the zoning setback
requirements for accessory structures.
The City processed this zoning violation as a typical violation in which
1) an Office Hearing with the City's Building Official was held, 2) as the
violation continued, a Citation Hearing with the Deputy District Attorney was
held (at which the Applicant was given 20 days to apply for a Variance),
3) with the zoning violation still in existence, the City requested the
Assistant District Attorney to prepare a criminal complaint against the
Applicant, and 4) a court date and Readiness Hearing with a judge was
scheduled.
Subsequently, the Property Owner applied for a Variance from the
following City setback regulations relating to Accessory Buildings:
1. Accessory structures must maintain a six-foot minimum setback from
other existing structures on the site.
2. Accessory structures shall not occupy the front half of a lot.
3. Accessory structures must maintain a six-foot setback fom the side
line of the front half of an abutting lot.
On July 29 and August 12, 1986, the Zoning Administrator held a public
hearing to consider the Variance application. After receiving testimony from
Staff, the Applicant and the public, the Zoning Administrator denied the
Applicant's Variance request, indicating the three mandatory findings of fact
could not be made to justify granting the Variance request.
ANALYSIS:
The Applicant indicates the existing shed is 8.25 feet by 6.5 feet and
has a height of 7.25 feet. The shed is four feet from the side propertyline,
1.66 feet from the house, and is approximately 43 feet from the front
propertyline.
-2-
The sideyard in which the shed is located is 14 feet wide. The required
sideyard setback for the main structure on this lot is 7 feet. The following
is a summary of the pertinent zoning setback requirements for accessory
structures and proposed/ existing shed setback:
Minimum Zoning
Requirement
Proposed/
Existing
Setback from other
structures on lot
6 feet
1. 66 feet
Front half of lot
56 feet
43 feet
Setback from sideline of
front half of abutting lot
6 feet
4 feet
In addition to non-compliance with the City's Zoning regulations
relating to Accessory Structures, the existing shed does not comply with
Building and Fire Code regulations. In order for the shed at its present
location to comply with the Building Code, a one-hour fire rated wall is
required on a portion of the house wall, the eaves of the house must be one-
hour fire rated, and the shed is required to have a one-hour rating.
Prior to granting a Variance, three affirmative findings of fact must be
made. The Applicant's and Staff's response to the mandatory findings are as
follows:
A. That there are special circumstances including size, shape, topography,
location or surroundings, applicable to the property which deprive the
property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity under
the identical zoning classification.
APPLICANT:
(1) Applicant had no knowledge of the requirement of setback.
(2) Before construction of said structure commenced, a grading plan
was filed with and reviewed by City Staff. Said plan indicates
with specificity the "shed pad." The landscape plan was submitted
by the Applicant's contractor, and no comment was made to the
contractor or owner by City Staff.
(3) Said structure was substantially completed before the Applicant
was made aware of his violation.
(4) No complaint was made by anyone in the neighborhood and/or
subdivision.
STAFF:
There are no special circumstances related to size, shape, topography,
location or surroundings of this property which would warrant granting a
variance, in that the lot is commensurate with other lots within the
immediate vicinity and zone. The lot is consistent with the Median Lot
Area (8,000 sq. ft.), and Median Lot Width (70 ft.) and minimum setback
requirements (7 ft. sideyards, 20 ft. front and rearyard) as established
for the zone in which it is located. The lot has sufficient sideyard
and rearyard area to locate the shed without the need for a Variance.
Relocation of the shed to the mid-point of the lot, 56 feet from the
front property1ine, would allow the Applicant to maintain the required
setback from existing structures on site, and would place the shed in
the rear half of the lot, thus eliminating the need for all three
Variance requests.
In response to the Applicant's statement that the location of the shed
pad was indicated on the landscape plans reviewed by Staff, the
Landscape Plan for the Hall Residence, filed with the Building
Department, does not label the subject area as a shed building pad.
-3-
B. That the granting of the application will not constitute a grant of
special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other
properties in the vicinity and zone.
APPLICANT:
(1) Said structure was constructed without any knowledge of the law
and without willful disregard of the zoning laws.
(2) The structure was substantially complete prior to Applicant's
awareness of the illegality. There remains adequate sideyard
access for fire and safety.
(3) Since the structure had been completed, no precedent will be set.
STAFF:
There is nothing unique or special regarding the size, shape or
topography of this lot which would preclude the Applicant from
maintaining consistency with the setback limitation placed on this
property and others in the vicinity and zone. The granting of this
Variance will constitute a special privilege.
C. That the granting of the application will not be detrimental to persons
or property in the neighborhood or to the public welfare.
APPLICANT:
(1) Other adequate sideyard access is available for fire and safety.
(2) No one in the neighborhood or subdivision has complained about the
use.
(3) Said structure is aesthetically pleasing and not a detriment to
the neighborhood.
STAFF:
The granting of this Variance may be detrimental to persons or property
in that as the accessory structure is presently constructed it does not
meet the Building and Fire Safety Code requirements.
Staff recommends denial of the Applicant's Variance request, in that an
affirmative response to all three findings of fact cannot be made. In
addition, other alternative locations on the site exist for the shed,
which would not result in the need for any Variance recommendation.
RECOMMENDATION:
FORMAT:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
Open public hearing.
Hear Staff presentation.
Hear Applicant and public presentations.
Close public hearing.
Adopt Resolution denying Variance request, or continue
item and provide direction to Staff.
ACTION:
Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the attached
Resolution upholding the Zoning Administrator's decision
denying PA 86-026 Hall-Fraser Variance.
-4-
ATTACHMENT:
Exhibit A: Resolution of Denial
Background Attachment: 1. Location Map
2. Plans, Applicant's Statement
3. Zoning Violation letter dated January 16,
1985
4. Portion of Landscape Plan on file with
Building Department
S. ZA Resolution No. 4-86
6. ZA Meeting Minutes: July 29, 1986, and
August 12, 1986
7. Applicant's Appeal Letter, dated August 20,
1986
-5-
RESOLUTION NO. 86-
A RESOLUTION OF THE DUBLIN PLANNING COMMISSION
UPHOLDING THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S ACTION DENYING
PA 86-026 HALL-FRASER VARIANCE REQUEST
TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN A REQUIRED YARD AREA
WHEREAS, Keith Fraser has filed an application on behalf of Ralph
Hall for a Variance from Sections 8-60.26 and 8-60.27 of the City's Zoning
Ordinance to allow a small accessory structure (shed) in a required yard area
at 11791 Bloomington Way; and
WHEREAS, the application has been reviewed in accordance with the
prOV1Slons of the California Environmental Quality Act and has been found to
be categorically exempt; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Administrator held public hearings on said
application on July 29, 1986, and August 12, 1986; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearings was given in all
respects as required by law; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending denial of the
Variance application; and
WHEREAS, after hearing and considering all said reports, recommen-
dations and testimony, the Zoning Administrator denied the Variance request
indicating that the three mandatory findings of approval could not be made;
and
WHEREAS, on August 20, 1986, Keith Fraser, representing the
Applicant, Ralph Hall, filed an appeal of the Zoning Administrator action; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on said
appeal on September 15, 1986; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all
respects as required by law; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending upholding the
Zoning Administrator's action denying the Variance applications; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Ccommission heard and considered all said
reports, recommendations, and testimony as hereinabove set forth;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Dublin Planning Commission
does hereby find that:
A) There are no special circumstances including size, shape, topo-
graphy, location or surroundings, applicable to the property which
would deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other property
in the vicinity under the identical zoning classification, in that
the property located at 11791 Bloomington Way is commensurate with
other property in the vicinity under the identical zoning
classification.
B) The granting of the Variance application will constitute a grant
of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other
properties in the vicinity and zone, in that there is sufficient
area in the rear half of the property (within the sideyard area
and the rearyard area) for the relocation of the shed, said
relocation would not necessitate a Variance request. Addi-
tionally, the granting of this Variance request will constitute a
special privilege in that other properties in the zone must main-
tain the required setbacks unless finding "a)" relating to special
circumstances can be made, no special circumstances peculiar to
this lot exist relating to size, shape or topography.
-1-
',..,,~ ,,+;l.'-i.<
A
1'(it
,) f,
C) The granting of this Variance application will be detrimental to
persons or property in the neighborhood or to the public welfare,
in that given the shed's present location and current construction
type, it is not in conformance with the Building and Safety Codes.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Dublin Planning Commission does
hereby deny PA 86-026 Variance application, thereby upholding the Zoning
Administrator's action, and directs the Applicant/Property Owner to remove the
existing accessory structure (shed) or relocate the accessory structure to an
area consistent with the setbacks for accessory structures in R Districts
(M.C. Section 8-60.26 and 8-60.27) prior to October 1, 1986.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of September, 1986.
Planning Commission
Planning Director
-2-
"'"l'-
'>r
'---
:'
'-4,:'" ~~
I
A", _.
APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE
WRITTEN STATEMENT OF RALPH HALL
Variance is necessary to Section 8-60.26, Accessory Buildings,
and 8-60.27.
Mr. Hall, without informing himself ~f the Ordinance, constructed
a utility shed which is 8'x6'xI0' high with cedar siding, a
pitch shake roof and painted the same color as his house.
The utility shed is on the north side of his house approxi-
mately five feet from the neighboring fence. There have been
no neighborhood complaints, and a variance is requested to
allow the accessory building to remain.
RECEIVED
I ' ~ R 2 '/ 1986
A Tf4PHM{r~T 2.A
"f'
. ~
Cf
(:-
VARNI, FRASER. HARTWELL, McNICHOLS & RODGERS
A PARTNII!;RSHIP INCLUDING PRO"II!;SSIONAL. CORPOR...TIONS
.JAMII!;S I. "'9Hl!:R
KEITH S. ,......SERiIl
.JOHN S.HARTWEL.L.
L.ORI!:NE KELLY-HOL.L.ISTER
......RTIN W.INOl!:ReITZEN
D",VID P. L....N ,..t:RM...N
eONNl1I!; LEWM"'N
STIltPHl!:N L.R.MCNICHOLS. .JR.
LIONEL A. ROOGERS..JR.
eRIAN o. SEIBII!;L
"'NTHONY l!I. V"'RNI
. 2109 FOURTH STREET
P. O. BOX !511
LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA 94S!50
(41!5) _7-1222
HAYWARD O,.,.ICIt
22:771 ",AIN STREET
P. O. !!lOX 570
HAYWARD, CAUFORNIA Q.4.543
(.4lsl eee- sooo
April 30, 1986
SOlANO COUNTY O"l""ICIt
1""'8 TE.NNESSEE. STRE.E.T
VALL~O,CALI"ORNIA ~!5li1'O
(707) &42-15-42
-" ~ftO"'USIONA" COftPOftATION
RECEIVED.
',986
:. .-.'( 1
PL~S"'NTON O,.,.'CE.
82: WEST NE"'L STREET
Pl.EASANTON I CALIFORNIA Q4!586
1.04lel a....e.gOZ!5
.... ......1
DUBLIN PLANNING
Al!:PI.. Y TO:
Livermore
FILE. NO:
608821
Ms. Maureen O'Halloran
Associate Planner
City of Dublin
P. O. Box 2340
Dublin, CA 94568
Re: PA 86-026-Ralph Hall
Variance Request
Dear Ms. O'Halloran:
Enclosed are the ten copies of the site plan accurately
drawn and fully dimensioned.
Findings:
a) Special circumstances.
(1) Applicant had no knowledge of the requirement
of setback.
(2) Before construction of said structure was com-
menced a grading plan was filed with and reviewed by City staff.
Said plan indicates with specificity the "shed pad." The land-
scape plan was submitted by applicant's contractor, and no
comment was made to contractor or owner by City staff.
(3) Said structure was substantially completed
before applicant was made aware of his violation.
(4) No complaint has been made by anyone in the
neighborhood and/or subdivision.
b) There is no granting of special privilege in that:
(1) Said structure was constructed without any
knowledge of the law and without wilful disregard of the zoninq
laws.
ATTaCHMENT ~
~n0-0Z0 fj
...
.~
@'"
C-':'__:
~~.:;..
@;.".
.:.::';'x.'
-';.r
Ms. Maureen Q'Halloran
Page 2
April 30, 1986
(2) The structure was substantially complete prior
to applicant's awareness of the illegality. There remains
adequate sideyard access for fire and safety.
(3) Since the structure had been completed, no
precedent will be set.
c) The granting of the application will not be detri-
mental to persons or property in the neighborhood or to the
public welfare in that:
(1) Other adequate sideyard access is available
for fire and safety.
(2) No one in the neighborhood or subdivision has
complained about the use.
(3) Said structure is asthetically pleasing and
not a detriment to the neighborhood.
Very truly yours,
VARNI,
McNICHOLS & RODGERS
5a~
s. FRASER
KSF:br
Enclosures
~-- ---..--.-.-----..- --- --.---..._-.----------- -_.__._--_.__._--~-------.--_._--....._------
--- - ~----- _..._-------~&.--.,;.-_....---------_.
,... ..,. JiJ!T W<<L
\ 0
.0
\ 0
\ 0 '8
\ 0
[-
\)
-rftll!t7.r1i
""""
~
- .---.-----
001
'o:-~ --", ~ 0 1
" oil 0 I ~
\+
\ 0 I
B
o
000
_ '" __._ .<~,.....;~X.;'j
~ . _ _ _ ."-.F:<-
"-' . _.,..",~
"""") 0 0 0 0,
..
o
. _..- _..
- ----..
--.-' -..-
. . .
..- . ---- .--
tAIl'''
.. -t-B
~ \ '
\
I
""... 0''' -r~
\0 ."
_ c-CXIN6'
I
/
I
-~E -r': I 0 0 0 ? 0 ,I,
~ "'iJ-7.~'" ;u.-NJ6...
I
.cr'oL ;:a-
A
fj~:'IO~,VC~
A3r""" c.:.r'-
o
:h/iIO~"
~/
&. eRAIt
c;~.ftU(
~
.,
~
b ;0
~ - - m
.......;-.
Z ;:.:; ()
I ~.:>
"tI m
~ ~ -
;Z -' 1.\' LMI:
<.0 <
~ <Xl ~iW'l!le~'
en m
0
o
o
tt~.
:'~~U-I.
I'
~ .......',. ~.' ..... r.... ~ t._........ ...5....r.. "-"
.. ~ '" ~ ,i'~ "'~ ~t~' ~ .- ..'~' ,
l A~ I B ~.;~ ", L."'{.'" ~.'."~.i~.:" '.'.' f;4
fi. . j~~iirnLli
'PAg~.oUo Inql t2;lOOMil\S{"t\
1
~
CITY OF DUBLIN
Development Services
P.O. Box 2340
Dublin, CA 94568
January 16, 1985
Planning/Zoning . 829-4916
Building & Safety 829.0822
Engineering/Public Works 829-4916
Hr. Ralph Hall
11791 Bloomington Way
Dublin, CA 94568
FILE COP l'
RE: ZONING VIOLATIONS AT 11791 BLOOMINGTON WAY
On January 9, 1985, a Stop Ivork Order was posted at -c.ne above
address for an accessory structure in the required side yard.
Your phone call to our office indicated that the structure was 7'
into the rear portion of your lot.
Your required side yard is 7 feet of open space on each side of
your yard and the zoning Ordinance, Section 8.60.26 (see
attached) states, in part, that no accessory structure shall be
constructed within 6 feet of any building, or within the front-
half of any lot in a R-Ois"trict, or required side yard. To
answer your statement, 56 feet is one-half of your lot. Your
side yard, where the structure is being built, is 14 feet in
width. Therefore, with the 7 feet required side yard and the 6
foot from any building requirement, the accessory structure shall
be removed by February 15, 1935, or moved to the rear portion of
your lot.
It was also brought to our attention that a mobil unit is being
stored in the required side yard, this is in violation of Section
8-60.33, (see attached) it shall also be removed by February 15,
1985.
On August 10, 1984, a building permit was issued for a sprinkler
system, deck, spa and exterior lighting. On August 16, 1984, an
inspection was made and a correction notice was left. As of t~
date no reins?ection has been called for. Therefore, within~
days, an inspection shall be called for to insure that the
corrections have been made.
If you have any questions, please call me at 329-0822, between
the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m.
~l\.\Lt,,~ II \\\~C~
ROBE?~T 'dHIJ.'E
DUILDE1G ACID ZO;-lE'lG
I~,TS:?ECTIO~\i
Enclosuj~,=
ATTACHMENT
c:
c
\
9
8-60.32 ACCESSORY STRUCTURES: IN REAR YARD. Except as other~ise
provided in Section 8-60.29 for a stable, detached Accessory
Buildings in an R District may occupy up to a maximu~ of thirty
per cent of the area of a required rear yard, provided that the
maximum 30% coverage provision shall not apply to private s~imming
pools.
(Amended by sec. 4, Ord. 68-33)
9
. .I :.':" ."
8-60.33 YARD REGULATIONS. In order to secure minlmum basic pro-
,.___vlslon for light, air, privacy and safety from fire hazar'ds, it is
required that every building hereafter constructed shall be u'pon'a -.,.,
Building Site of dimensions such as to' provid~ for 'J;'he"y'ards" . ........ .
specified for the District in ~hich the lot is located, and the'follo~~
ing sections shall apply and control. Every such Yard shall be open, .
and unobstructed from the ground up~ard, '.except 'as otheI>:1ise"pr;vided':)"~
for Accessory Buildings in Sections 8-60.27,-.8-60.31 and 8':60.32, 'for
fences in Section 8-60.53 and for other buildings"in'Section 8-60.37
and for signs as regulated by Section 8-60.65 and Section 8-60.59.(b).
No 110bilehome, Rec~eational Vehic'le,utility .trailer~ .;nm~~~t~d samper
top or' boat shall be stored in the Front ):ard or the required Side .:".
~ardinanyRDistiiCt". ' "':''''-,'-:::':;;>'~''
(,blended by sec. 11, Ord. 68-27; a.'!lended by' sec. 5, 'Ord. 68-33;
a.-nended by sec. 4, Ord. 69-93) , ..... . ;.:.
9
8-60.34 YARDS: DI~~~SIONS. Every front yard shall have a depth equal
to or greater than that required for the District,and shall extend across
the full ~idth of the front of the Building Site. . Every Rear Yard
shall have a depth equal to or greater than that required for the
District and shall extend across the full ~idth of the rear of the
Building Site. Every Side Yard shall have a ~idth'equal to or greater
than that required for the District and shall extend along J;he side Lot
Line fro~ the front Lot Line to the rear Lot Line.
9 8-60.35 Y. DS: ME..I..SUREHENT: RE.~'R. A..'iD SIDE LiliES. The measureoent of
the r~qui~~d depth of a Rear Yard or the required width of an interior
side yard shall be horizontal and inward from the Lot Line at a right
angle. ~nere the side Lot Lines converge, or nearly converge, a line
ten (10) feet long ~ithin the lot, parallel to the front Lot Line and
at a maxL'llum distance therefrom shall be deemed to be the rear Lot Line
for the purposes of this se~tion.
~
8-60.36 YARDS: ~ASuKE~NT: FRONT LINE. The measurement of the required
depth of a Front Yard, or the required ~idth of the street side yard
of a Corner Lot, shall be horizontal and in~ard from the street Lot
Line at a right angle; provided, however, that .where any official
right-or-way line, or any Future Width Line pursuant to Section
8-80,0, traverses the building site, the measure!:lent here specified
shall be taken fren such right-of-way line, such Future Width Line or
fron the street Lot Line, whichever produces the lesser yard. Through
Lots have two fr~nt Lot Lines, from each of which a Front Yard shall
be measured.
I
'j
/.1
\
"
., \
)) '\
. {
--
\,
'1
/
--,....
.~.. -;".' ':~':~::;:_'~ '. -' - .
..;~~~:~;
...
. _ ._.-__'_W.
'..:. ...~
. . ....;.___ ~'_:#"__"': .:'~ . --_.-....:i.._::...~~~...~_::..':..-~~~.:':"- "_#_'. : :- -; :.... .
.<J ':dll~' ('.1 1 H'I:Jn2 . !):f~...iii.V';;..\ 5J~= '.Jd[J~;jf~1.':/~'li:'21:!3;;J!0~~:Z,~~':';'G:::~8r, C:.,~g '.':'
:)"'w.€i':~:I.~:;;~~'~r;,;r;~I~'~I~~1~f~;7.. ~
";:::'"distu'- c'e' p"'erceptibl~'lat or beyond ~ihe lot '\ines;-~n.: .Li:"....
,:::., _ 'Irl;:' rtc. .., f_r-;.';' '. ...... ~.,...,.. .-"..... '!--. ,,-'~,'H'~'r,:(O_.y..r;;.n.r;.:ai1.. I"!"'.:-n~" ....., ~--t-.
g) . Any use o. Front Yard or S~deyard for constructio repair or
..... .". " ."r-; . -.,,: "":'....;~. -.r .... ',r -.-, -1,1;"" lO '-':J IU'IH~l a.,' 0"_.:>'<]",
.. _ dismantling' or t use - in the' aggregate .of :an 'ar greater 'than one-
fourth (lz;) of the are '. the Dwellini'Unit;'~ .~~::;r:,:;,~:~~.~;;~~~ - .
_. ", ~". ........ '..", ..0" ....'.,-.......~. _',.' ......_r...~.;....-....;:.. -. .,.....~--_. ~ : ..-.. _.':. "
h) .~AnJ:~~~g~... 0:~3H..:}h.~~qt~~~;n.~ . lat~.l'pe ,. ...~~d.,i!l_~.!~~.D~~t.r~ct,;: ;'oi-o ,c . .~'..!
i).':'lC~l}~~Etj~f~..~~p.3:;r:~~E(,~h?~,~~~~?~ _ l','\.'?~.s~.t;~~~e~E~E~_~fJ~_c_e,~.r_~ising.. '., "i:-:-~
:_: T-;:.~J~:-J'!E ~~~_e~o~f_~a~~1..~t,(,p'e~~.:or _.;.~,~./\~,~.."e ;te:.,g~,fE!-}~,ci!l~,~~~l~~~,,~{:,.>: ,:;,"__~:'~.;1:~;A
. . 'n;.~.:.:or.swimming .or,.an. asse d .c1as.s~9f.:.Jl1o,re..lt.. .two~c(2)'pupi1s, "b;.~...:-'=':f,--"'-~'~
.~<;. ,'/:-:>j ):h:<;,The:repaii.-;';'~5er\Ti' .' ,~:painting':pi.- td.is~ntiing~o -'CO'-tot ~yehiCles'O~'i~S~;;':~:~;Z?jF~~~
.. .,..; '_,:~: :'~:;\::~"~;::'::~;'of r~l.e:t.rica To' ,.ef.~}g~;:a.tb.r s;r:;~~~~~~t~~ylr!~~1t:.eE,a',::"se~~~~ :~ipli~r;~~~r0i}t~
.: ; .',';;k) X,.;:The 'ren .fL:r?oms :?~~ i.the 'p:rovi~ing }':~ ~t..a.el,.~,.;,~~~;~:f.or.(m.__ .tha~~ ~~ur .iJ:t':h~.i%~~
. ......1~",..(4 rsons,-or;if licensedbythe;State Jlepartmentlof ',Mental Hyg e for~:'':'.',~Ai:l
.~~~~~~~t~i;~~~~~~~:j11;~~fi~ri~~~ifit~ii~~~!~f~;'75;t~W;~'~J
9. .'. ,8::~6~'. :~~ /:t,~C~~,S~~! :~~~s1~~~!:~~T,~9_~~ ~t:~!.l-~~E~3}J?~~~Ii>l~~t~e.s;~~:~h~jremises for
..' < _' the jise -o'f ,the 'l2<;:C;':1pa?ts. ~~~"~<?r(n::pay~~g . ~~,s~;;_~r..~_ p~~~~~tt.~d, ~~~n -, q~alified as
.:.:_ ......Accessory Uses in any'District. .' Private swimming' pools"shall-be-regulated as
-:.;---::~'A'. ". ' !"S.. -.;::>0'. r~. ..\~'.1 f....t;.~-::"'Qr:...r-!-'-r~_.::s('".....t:r..c .c:;"v-:l,-v.~.f.j_.~,~~.~"I~Hl;;';~3...:...,j...-;~..;.....:;:) -
.... ccessory tructures...."'_~..,. \.. I.,....:... ~..,.,lf. ~h....:..fOo ::..,,"::::' ,";.'-;...'--:..L. .....,;.--~.... '- .
_ ._~.,> __ ~__.~......... 3'..-1 'I-;.,~",==",,:)~,,:, r,_.".- _."..J .-;........~~.<)_.....p,o. ti'..-. ~.1;.u3__.JJ..~......q '11')!Jn
.; '('Am-c'd' d']; :;~ ~5~2'''O-'d ':;'68-:3'3)' :c.,-i, :oJ::n~~~.f;j;:,,:__;-;r.;:;,:.!'!o'?(),'SdbIl'J~ '~-::; rrt
.;--:: eon .~_ ".X;.~:.:'~';; r~':~ .~~::~,,::'J~~)~':.'~~ .~::~~:O~~B,,1i~:~~?~Y'~~~~~;}~: .~."r::~
~ 8-60.24 ACCESSORY USES: LIVESTOCK. In any R District 'Where the Accessory Use
is the maintaining of one or more horses or cows, any outdoor space used by the
same shall be in a fenced area located entirldy ort-the -rear'''h3.lf of the Lot, no
part 'of which is Within 'fifteen '. (15) f eetof .the"Lot1Line "nor. forty ..(40) fp.et "('~".':
from any . Dwelling':" ::;.i,.:~':j::;.::: -.,; ':5.:-_'::; .:<:.,,;"{<1 c"li:~:O"'~O!!~'l.~r:.:I6rl.1y-O: !'!!:.o-i, '. ~ -_:../
(Repeal:~'~Y"';::~: .~~';:;: 'i;~~9; 'C',," ":~;~~~~~~~~*~i~Y~;~~f;;~.. .;;,1
8-60.25 ACCESSORY USES: PETS, LIVESTOCK,' BEES, 'EXOTIC :,A,,'lIMALS .'."Thekeeping --" ,
;.of pets, livestock, .bees and ,ex?tic ~n~~~~. .!~;,:wh:iSh..}~pe~~t, has'.~~.e~ obt.ained " f.:{:J
. in accordance. with.appli<:~ble . !,egul~tio~s."a:.~~,~~t;i.~,:~;'~~~~,~#;?~~~~~;~~.~~.~...i, ~:v," c:A;,i~i8
animals otherwise permitted by this Chap,~~J_:.~''''~~(':!';:~~85?:e=-4;-;'i,';-i'''~}:;;;j~''' .-"i:;. ".-'" ,:;1:.:t'~a
.. .." " ,. .-.:-; '.iJ.i::':::;>i';~!,..:,:";:'''{;':;'~i:';':-.~~'' ~'""'.' '. . ~
(Original repealed by sec. I, Ord. 75-29; Amended ,by"Sec 2, .Ord:",75-29) :....... ....', . .;.,;:.:;;:_,~
, .<.- ,/[::- ::.~;~D. '~:I)\:,~Xi. :l~ ;~q~~~'.~.:r,'::;:;.j ,ji;:i::~rb::;~.ti1.~;;~;~~~l;~W;~~~;~?fl1:J{-~';};~L ~ '~::;':'~':'.'~{tlff~
.9 .' 8-60.25A -"'ACCESSORY USES:':'EXOTIC ANIMALS._'~;.,Exotic~Animals.;cfor_~hic_h.::a. permit /'-;"':. .:\:t:e:~~f.'.t:
has 'been obtained in accordan:ce'with Article'7.'of.~ha'pt'er;:3,:::Title. 3 "of ' . :;~':"~?
the Alameda County Ordinance Code are permitted~in,addition '.,to.:those .ani- ;:::'-'.;
. . .' .... ..~._~_......_.._.--...:.....,.i....... .~..._- \.-.. .,
mals otherwise permitted by this Chapter. .:' ,:;:,~,;;/:~~';~';:';;~e91I,;.]::o.'.',.... .
~'. . :Jt:~ 18):~ ':~S:J~ '-~Z~~ ~;.2)
(,J
,,:,:<~p
. ," ~
.r
. .-..
. .
9
on sec.
2, Ord. 72-16; repealed by Sec. 1,'Ord. 75-29)
.. ..~ ...,.:' .;.j .... 4...... :.__,.,_:: ~,....... ~..~ ._.._.,::....
''': ...,.. ..-..- -.,1';:;. ~.,. ,..," .,,.
'..'-..
8-60.26 ACCESSORY BUILDINGS. Every Access;rY Building attached to a Main
Building shall be subject to all the requirements of this chapter
applicable to the Main Building. No detached Accessory Building in an
R District shall be located within six (6) feet of any other Building
on the same Lot, or have more than one 'Story 'or '.a ,Height- in excess of
fifteen (15) feet. . . .....--- ..
. ,~ . .-.. .: ..'~ .. . .,,' ':';:.,-:' .:;:.
(
:
__~...., _IL""')_
. ~ .._1_-
, ~""':J"
':~.;"":,7>;r:.::_-;'"::;~-",:?:,":::::::-~~.":."- -?
..
- '. : ;
-
-
..
" 0 on
) - > n
.. >
, .~ '" r
~ '"
, :.4! Xl
-
-:;" ", '-,
i '~, .,'1'0.-
" , ;' ..: '"~
.... .~ ~>.
'i,'Oi ... ,.
-' 1-.
~:.'~ u )-,
.-..... 'S.
:~ J;
~ . >
.. ;.....
."'., ~ .. :;.':~
'"
0 ,.
<
, '" "
0
CD ~.:
, ~ 1';,
'~ ...:.~
" ~.~ . ~
., :"or; . ,
"\: .....~ \';'"
-
0 0
'" '"
> >
,l..j ~ ~
z z
" CD
, ,.....:,-,,,,.... .-... \ ...,
\
\
i
I
\
i
\
"~-~_. -~;~;;~~~.-
'. f;.
. . I ~
1'1
I Ii
! 11
[ 11)
i I;:
: rl"
. I:
tit
tq
ill
.~._--_.._.._---_...._--_! i ~:
Ii:
!:~~;~::,~l~.7-7.~~~;':_~~_:"_~
I . ..
: ...-', :!
i \.. :-,"'-~~. H
i '4._"'- i!.
: -J .:,.
i:-. .
::::..~
~! .\ t- '-
)!' J ~ --'
- _. - .---- ~i.: -~..~
~.......-.-.~-
n I . 'E\
r',"
.,. - .
. .
. . .
. .. .
I
I
I
i
r------.
r-;.-
. '
'.- I ..'--.~
! .......-..,.-.-...
: '\ -)
(/ !
, ,
I, I..
.' ' t
..;::~
li'
,
()
;- \
I / "
J" (.
-. ..... ~'--.
')..
:....
\
'\
\
'.
(1)--
r-;
I
!
i
L
.'
'.
~
tP-
!
I
~~
;
/
I
\
I
t
,
F.
~;
;--...-.--......... _.._..--.e-..i~:-.-
~i .
': .
~. ..
,
\;
l
~;.
,.
r:
t~_
c'-- ,_,,_ _ ; I
" I -';T
I
--'
\
i~
\
\..
'"
\
\.......
,
'-#............... . ~
a...~
.:.."::
;1
.,
;1
!!
;,
j
'-
. ~."
-------------,
, '.........
',-;
\
.-, '"'h' #l;
:,
(- ~I
J I:
'....~:
e----:
[....,
",'" "
..... \ I
.L\
i
;
;'
\.
I
!
-../'
..'-
_/
"
~-~1
/
"
/
)
:, .',..J . . \
~-_.___~_4.__-:r--"\\.---r8.
1 , t /.~.> f '.
", '..... ..._~ f
-"""-, i
\ / '\ i
"~ ./' U
r' b
I r/-" ~
. \ i ,---"--,, .):
\./ ,-/ -. -..., i
I .' ............, ~
'l )"//." .0 \ [(
, .[:---) ".,.
. _..L.___c__._..:\6-._.:....._.._.__ ':..-:i:=k--_.. _ ___~ .
\ I. I 'i
\ \'. Iii i
\ . '. I ". I I : I
. ;"____.,.___.J___________,! ._._.___...l .----..-.... ..--- --t-- L .__n___._
.., ~~---..._-_... --.- ---_.-..._._----_.~-.-~_. ,------
I .
,----.-.---.. -_.:. - -. ---- --.:=-.~-=-~ -~~~.:~~:.:~:~-~.==::.:..-:. :-=--~-_:~.: ~:~
\
\.
\
I
!
~ .
!
!
i
j
i ..-
...... ' --
. I /'
................_-$ ---.; .
,.,......
.. -
,
--'?-
'.
S)
,--I
-)-
I
.
C
I
\
..
NO~l'tt WC'!>f -PoR-TiON OF L~~c..A'"P{, -PLAN
ON fILE I)J 1'1 H "'Bur 1..1)/1'0 ~ -r;>€Pl".
A TT ACHMENT &J
-pf-. 8 ~- 6 2. ~ I t 1 q I "B\OOfY\.~+n
'. ...'
.>'/
. >;,y"~..~:t.Zi~sf:':!~'I:\:Z.r:"~0-:_~::.,,;~.,,,~~::::~:: ..:
~.
((
.,./
.r..'.
RESOLUTION NO. 4~86
A RESOLUTION OF TIlE DUBLIN ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
------------------------------------------------
DENYING PA 86-026 HALL-FRASER VARIANCE REQUEST
TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN A REQUIRED YARD AREA
WHEREAS, Keith Fraser has filed an application on behalf of Ralph
Hall for a Variance from Sections 8-60.26 and 8-60.27 of the City's Zoning
Ordinance to allow a small accessory structure (shed) in a required yard area
at 11791 Bloomington Way; and
WHEREAS, the application has been reviewed in accordance with the
prov~s~ons of the California Environmental Quality Act and has been found to
be categorically exempt; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Administrator held a public hearing on said
application on July 29, 1986, and August 12, 1986; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all
respects as required by law; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending denial of the
Variance application; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Administrator heard and considered all said
reports, recommendations and testimony as hereinabove set forth;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Dublin Zoning
Administrator does hereby find that:
A) There are no special circumstances including size, shape,
topography, location or surroundings, applicable to. the property
which would deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other
property in the vicinity under the identical zoning classifica-
tion, in that the property located 11791 Bloomington Way is
commensurate with other property in the vicinity under the
identical zoning classification.
B) The granting of the Variance application will constitute a grant
of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other
properties in the vicinity and zone, in that there is sufficient
area in the rear half of the property (within the sideyard area
and the rearyard area) for the relocation of the shed, said
relocation would not necessitate a Variance request.
Additionally, the granting of this Variance request will
constitute a special privilege in that other properties in the
zone must maintain the required setbacks unless finding
.a) relating to special circumstances can be made, no special
circumstances peculiar to this lot exist relating to size, shape
or topography.
C) The granting of this Variance application will be detrimental to
persons or property in the neighborhood or to the public welfare,
in that given the shed's present location and current construction
type, it is not in conformance with the Building and Safety Code.
BE IT FURTIlER RESOLVED that the Zoning Administrator does hereby
deny PA 86-026 Variance application and directs the Applicant/Property Owner
to remove the existing accessory structure (shed) or relocate the accessory
structure to an area consistent with the setbacks for accessory structures in
R Districts (M.C. Section 8-60.26 and 8-60.27) prior to August 29, 1986.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of August, 1986.
'-1'l1cu,( W...A. ot-tlJ!mu,=--
Associate Planner
7nn;nn A~m;n;Q~r~~nr
.~ ~~ ~ ~~ "'~f~\l\ ,.
J 1 j i i~t:~ Ht~{t~.J I 5
"f'fl rC -" {: 2..1..:' 11/~"? l :C:).i~'C'i}" /-1 <':',1 +T~'~
Regular Meeting - July 29, 1986
A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Zoning Administrator was held on
July 29, 1986, in the Conference Room at 6500 Dublin Boulevard. The meeting
was called to order at 10:10 a.m. by Laurence Tong, Zoning Administrator.
* * * *
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Laurence L. Tong, Zoning Administrator, and Maureen O'Halloran,
Associate Planner.
* * * *
PUBLIC HEARING
SUBJECT:
PA 86-026 Hall-Fraser Variance,
11791 Bloomington.
Mr. Tong, Zoning Administrator, opened the public hearing and called for the
Staff Report.
Ms. O'Halloran advised that the Applicant was requesting approval to vary from
the setback requirements relating to accessory buildings. She indicated three
Variances were involved: 1) a six-foot setback from other structures on the
site; 2) location of the accessory structures within the front half of the
lot; and 3) six feet from the front half of the adjoining property's side lot
line. She advised that the following findings of fact must be made in order
to approve the Variance request: 1) that there are special circumstances
relating to the size, shape or topography of the lot - there are no special
circumstances relating to this site in that the lot is consistent with the
median lot area, median lot width, and minimum setback requirements;
2) whether granting of the Variance will constitute a special privilege -
without being able to make the first finding, the granting of this Variance
would constitute a special privilege; 3) whether the granting of the Variance
would be detrimental to persons or property in the neighborhood - the
accessory structure as constructed does not meet the City's Building Code and
may be detrimental to the property. Staff recommended that the Zoning
Administrator deny the Variance application.
Keith Fraser, 2109 Fourth Street, Livermore, Attorney representing the
Applicant, stated findings could be made that there are extenuating circum-
stances. He said the Variance will serve the equity of the public and owner.
He stated that Mr. Hall had no knowledge of the requirements and that prior to
building the shed, he had visited the City with Mr. Ron Wyle.
Mr. Ralph Hall, Applicant, stated that a couple of months prior to
constructing the shed, he was thinking of what type to build, metal or wood,
and where to put it. He said he visited the City Offices and was told if the
shed is less than 100 square feet or 15 feet tall, no building permit was
required. He said he had spoken with Mr 'T'''"0hAr
Regular Meeting
ZAM-6
~.. "I"" T I.... A............, '..... ~.<...I......'.......!f!,..('. "..' l... .If... T
~! .. ".. t:.'~'! ,'~ it~.'.);1 ;~~_ t;:~ <. !tr;,'~
~ . i ~':~. ;," .:....:,.;,."~ t\"
\l' I rif';J~ ~~i:~~ i .
!;; ~. ,. " /.' '.,
(0
Mr. Ron Wyle, 8620 Southwick, stated he had visited the City Offices with
Mr. Hall and asked if a shed could be metal or wood. He said it didn't seem
to matter as long as it was under 100 square feet and 15 feet tall. He said
he had spoken to two men at the counter and then to Mr. Taugher.
Mr. Fraser stated the case was heading towards criminal court, then referred
to the City for Variance consideration.
Mr. Hall stated that after receiving the Stop Work Order, he asked at the City
Offices why he had received it. He said the person he had spoken with was
unable to tell him. He indicated since it was the rainy season and he only
had a few shingles left, he decided to finish the work. He said he thought
the Stop Work Order was issued because he didn't have a permit. He said a few
weeks later he received a letter from Mr. White stating non-compliance with
the Zoning Code.
Mr. Robert Rubino, 11793 Bloomington, an adjacent neighbor, indicated the shed
doesn't bother him. He said the building is not unsightly; it matches the
house.
Mr. Jim McCorder, 11799 Bloomington, stated the shed does not bother him; the
appearance is very pleasing.
Mr. Fraser stated that the Landscape Architect, Eric Hansen, drew landscape
plans indicating the location of the shed, and which were submitted to the
City. He advised that prior to construction of the shed, there were three
inspections.
Mr. Hall stated he had gone out of his way to find out the regulations and
apologized if he missed something. He said the cost of the shed was $1,200.
Mr. Wylie stated that Mr. Hall had
the City before building the shed.
should apply.
tried to do what was right by checking with
He said he thought the Variance rule
Mr. Tong ascertained from Mr. Hall that he had spoken with Mr. DeLuca, who no
longer works for the City. Mr. Tong further ascertained from Mr. Hall that
the pad for the shed was part of the landscape contract. He said the pad was
there during the three inspections with Mr. White, and nothing was said about
it until construction of the shed had begun. Mr. Fraser indicated that the
meeting with Mr. DeLuca was held on July 19, 1984. Mr. Hall stated that
during the 10-day period of the Stop Work Order, he picked up the Variance
Application Form from the City. He said he didn't understand the application,
so he met with Mr. DeLuca. He indicated that during this meeting, Mr. DeLuca
stated the City of Dublin never granted Variances, and that the application
would be a waste of time.
Mr. Tong closed the public hearing.
Mr. Tong advised that there are several different aspects to the Variance,
such as the zoning aspect relating to setback requirements, and the Building
and Fire Code regulations requiring the structure to be six feet from existing
structures on the site.
Regular Meeting
ZAM-6-2
July 29, 1986
Mr. Tong stated that the three findings must be made based on facts presented
at the hearing in order to grant a Variance. He also indicated that in the
upcoming year, the City will be re-evaluating various aspects of the existing
Zoning Ordinance, possibly looking at where accessory structures can be
located. Mr. Tong advised that there are Building and Fire Code requirements
which must be met in order for the structure to be within six feet from the
existing structure. He also said there are substantial requirements that
would have to be met, such as the one-hour fire wall within a portion of the
existing structure, a one-hour rating for the eaves, and a one-hour fire
rating for the tool shed. He advised that a similar requirement would apply
if the shed is within three feet of the property line.
Mr. Tong indicated at this point that he could not make the three findings
required by the Zoning Ordinance. He advised that three options are
available: 1) relocate the shed to the back half of the lot, six feet from
the house and three feet from the property line; 2) if the tool shed was
attached to the house it would be regarded as the main structure, and would be
required to be seven feet from the property line, and Fire and Building Code
regulations would have to be met; and 3) if the Zoning Variance through action
by the City was granted, the Fire and Building Codes would still have to be
met.
Mr. Tong advised that he could not grant the Variance in that the findings
relating to the Zoning regulations could not be made.
Mr. Tong also indicated that if the item was continued for one year, pending
Zoning Ordinance revisions, a cash deposit or letter of credit would be
required to assure compliance with the Building and Fire Code requirements, or
to assure removal if the Zoning Ordinance is not revised to allow the shed in
its existing location.
ADJOURNMENT
At 11:30 a.m., the public hearing was continued to a Zoning Administrator
meeting on August 12, 1986, at 10:00 a.m. in the Conference Room at 6500
Dublin Boulevard, to allow the Applicant to consider requesting a one-year
continuance.
/ )
;'
-"j'l./.' ~ ( (';, / \. "'-- ,....
'- __ ~ >J ,_\ _ \ "" I... J_
/~ ~~ - : '-----
Associate Planner
Regular Meeting
ZAM-6-3
July 29, 1986
Regular Meeting - August 12, 1986
A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Zoning Administrator was held on
August 12, 1986, in the Conference Room at 6500 Dublin Boulevard. The meeting
was called to order at 10:00 a.m. by Laurence Tong, Zoning Admnistrator.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Laurence L. Tong, Zoning Administrator, and Maureen O'Halloran,
Associate Planner.
PUBLIC HEARING
SUBJECT:
PA 86-026 Hall-Fraser Variance,
11791 Bloomington.
Mr. Tong, Zoning Administrator, opened the public hearing, stating the item
had been continued from the July 12, 1986, Zoning Administrator meeting.
There being no public present, Mr. Tong closed the public hearing and denied
the Variance request.
RESOLUTION NO. 4-86
A RESOLUTION OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
DENYING PA 86-026 HALL-FRASER VARIANCE REQUEST TO ALLOW
AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN THE REQUIRED YARD AREA
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:05 a.m.
^ ,
/If/cUt {(I I. L /
Associate Planner
(t (
I
\-~7 f (.
Regular Meeting
ZAM-6-1
August 12, 1986
~
@.."",
.'~:'i5:
-....
VARNI, FRASER. HARTWELL, McNICHOLS & RODGERS
A PAFtTNI!:ASHIP INCLUDING PROf'Ii!:SSIONAL CORPORATIONS
.JAMES I. ,..SHER
KEITH s. FRASItR*
.JOHN S. HARTWELL-
LORIi!:NI!: KELLY-HOLLISTER
MARTIN W.INOER8ITZI!:N
DAVID P. LAN ....ERMAN
80NNIE LEWMAN
STI!:PHEN L.R.MCNICHOLS....R.
UONEL A. ROOGl!:RS. .JR.
l!5RIAN O. 5l!:181!:L
ANTHONY e. VARNI
2109 FOURTH STREET
P. O. BOX 511
LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA 94550
(415) _7-1222
HAYWARD OFFICE:
22771 MAIN STREET
P. O. BOX 570
HAYWARD, CAUF'ORNlA 94!543
......5188115- SOOO
August 20, 1986
SOLANO COUNTY OFFICE
I<4U5 TENNESSEE STREET
VALL..E.JO.CALIF'ORNIA 904590
17071 &42-15-42
*... P"O...ESSIONAL CORPORATION
PLEASANTON or-neE
ez WEST NEAL STREET
PLEASANTOH.CAUF'ORNlA ~ee
(AIS) &4e.g025
REPLY TO:
Livermore
riLE NO:
608821
Zoning Administrator
City of Dublin
P. O. Box 2340
Dublin, CA 94568
Subject:
PA 86-026, Hall-Fraser Variance
11791 Bloomington Way, Dublin
Dear Sir:
On behalf of Ralph Hall an appeal is requested from
the denial of the variance heard on July 29, 1986, and
submitted for decision on August 12, 1986.
The findings of the Zoning Administrator are incon-
sistent with the evidence presented; further, that the
findings in favor of appellant can be made; further, that
the City of Dublin is estopped to deny the variance;
further, that the state of the future requirements for
outbuildings is in such a state of flux that the structure
can be permitted without prejudice to the people of the
City of Dublin and other issues to be raised at the time
of hearing on appeal.
Request is further made that the tape recording made
at the public hearing on July 29, 1986, be preserved for
further hearings in this matter.
Yours very truly,
VARNI,
& RODGERS
TlECEIVED
AUG 201986
KSF:br
cc: Mr. Ralph Hall
0U8UN PlANNING
ATTACH ENT 7
IF ( ,'. _--1 ' !-,? 1.~,rJ.
:', .. (, v (,,0