HomeMy WebLinkAbout7.1 Zoning Violation Canterbury Court 4s o—� V
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING 'DATE: November 26, 1984
SUBJECT: Abatement of Zoning Violation at
7650 Canterbury Court, Dublin, Ca
EXHIBITS ATTACHED: 1 - Agenda Statement from City Council
Meeting, October 8, 1984 with
attachments
2 - Minutes of City Council Meeting
October 8, 1984
RECOMMENDATION: Direct City Attorney to commence action
to abate the Zoning Violations under
Ordinance 09-84
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: Costs are not known at this time
however, they are recoverable from the
property owner
DESCRIPTION: On October 8, 1984 , the City Council
continued the abatement of the Zoning Violation at 7650
Canterbury Court, Dublin. During the City Council discussion,
the City Attorney indicated that a lot line adjustment could
possibly bring this addition into conformance if there was
adequate room and Mr. McCartney ' s neighbor concurred. The City
Council continued the matter until November 26 , 1984 , to allow
Mr. McCartney sufficient time to pursue possible remedies to the
situation.
Staff reviewed with Mr. McCartney the four options previously
indentified:
1) A room addition of approximately 21 feet 8 inches by 8 feet
2 ) A room addition of approximately 17 feet 9 inches by 10 feet
3 ) Change the existing room addition to an open patio structure
4 ) Remove the structure
Mr. McCartney stated that he is still looking for a possible
remedy in addition to the four options and the lot line
adjustment . He said he would discuss possible remedies with the
City Council at the meeting.
Staff recommends that the City Council direct the City Attorney
to commence action to abate the Zoning Violation under
Ordinance 09-84 .
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ITEM NO. / ! COPIES TO:
William McCartney
City Attorney
Planning Department
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE : October 8, 1984
SUBJECT: Abatement of Zoning Violation at 7650
Canterbury Court, Dublin
EXHIBITS ATTACHED : 1) Planning Commission Resolution 84-26
2 ) City Council Resolution 82-84
3 ) Letter dated August 24, 1984
4 ) Ordinance 09-84
RECOiNIMENDATION: Direct City Attorney to commence action
to abate the zoning violations under
Ordinance 09-84
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: Costs are not known at this time
however, they are recoverable from the
property owner.
DESCRIPTION: On September 14 , 1983, while making a routine
inspection in the area, it was noted construction work was
being done on the building at 7360 Canterbury Court, without
a permit. Investigation revealed that the interior of the
house was being extensively remodeled. Also, there was a
14 ' 9" x 2118" room, at the rear, which extended to within
516" of the property line . The zoning ordinance requires 20
feet from the rear of the building to the property line .
According to the owner, there was an enclosed aluminium
patio structure at the rear of the building when he acquired
the property . This was removed and completely reconstructed
as a fully enclosed room. At the time of the first
inspection, the room was virtually completed and lacked the
completion of the exterior siding. Installation of the
siding was subsequently completed in violation of a Stop
Work Order .
Subsequently Mr . McCartney applied for a variance to permit
a reduction of the rear yard, so as to allow the addition to
remain . The variance request was denied by the Planninc
Commission. and the City Council .
On August 24 , 1934 , Mr . McCartney was requested to secure a
permit to revise the room, or to remove it. As of this
date , nothing has been done .
--------------------------
e� w
COPIES TG: William MCCev n '_`j
�•'m1+7 °°° Cit_� A�.to_ney
I
r
RESOLUTION N0. 84-26
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
---------------------------------------
DENYING PA 83-060 WILLIAM MCCARTNEY VARIANCE REQUEST TO
ALLOW A ROOM ADDITION IN A REQUIRED YARD AREA
WHEREAS, William McCartney has filed an appeal of the
Zoning Administrator's decision which denied his variance rec::est
(PA 83-060) ; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public
hearing on said appeal on May 21, 1984; and
WHEREAS, said hearing was continued at the applicant's
recuest to the Planning Commission meeting on June 4, 1984; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given
in all respects as recuired by law; and
WHEREAS,' this application has been reviewed in
accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality act and has been found to be categorically exempt; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending the
appeal be denied; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and consider
a' l said reports, recommendations, and testimony as hereiaa'--ove
sez fort::;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dut-lin Planning
Ccmmission does hereby find that:
l) The variance request,
if approved, would give the applicant a
special privilege not enjoyed by others in the same Zcn:ng
District;
2) There are no unusual circumstances relating to lot sire,
configuration, or topogrphy associated with Mr. McCartney's
property;
3) If the permits had been a_plied for, the rocm addit_pn would
never have been constructed.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Dublin Planning
Cc--fission does hereby deny said appeal
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of June, 19a-
AYES: Cormissioners Alexander, Barnes, Mac'-, Rale•, and
Petty
DICES: Nona
ABSENT. None 1
P anning Commission CSd---„•,
A: . = \ 1
DLractor %
C?
RESOLUTION NO- 82-84
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
---------------------------------------------- -------------------
DENYING PA 83-060 WILLIAM MCCARTNEY VARIANCE REQUEST TO
ALLOW A ROOM ADDITION IN A RE VARIANCE
YRD AREA
WHEREAS, William McCartney filed an application* for a
.-
llow a room addition in a required
yard area at 7650_
variance to a
Canterbury Court; and
Administrator. held a public hearing..:---,..-:
WHEREAS, the Zoning
on said application I and denied the application on February 28,
1984 ; and
WHEREAS, the ,
William McCartney has filed an appeal o-.
Zoning Administrator ' s action which denied his variance request
(p,pL 83-060 ) ; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public
hearing on said appeal on May 21, 1984 ; and
WHEREAS, said hearing was continued at the asolicanL.
s
rec:uest to the Planning COMMIS ion meeting on June 4 , 1984 , at
denied the request; and
which time the Planning CcrL�n
. iss4-or. d
WHEREAS, Mrs . McCartney filed an appeal of the Planning
Commission' s action denying the recuest; and
WHEREAS, the City Council did hold a public hearing on
said appeal on August 13 , 1934 ; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given
in all respects as required by law; and
WHEREAS,
this application has been reviewea in accordance with the provisions of the ,California Environmental
Quality act and has been found to be categorically exempt; and
WHEREAS, Staff Staff Report was sub.mitted recommending the
appeal be denied; and
WHEREAS , the City Council did hear and consider all
testimony as herRinA '-
said reccTM-_endatic ns , and tes,, ;.L '
forth;
(T-'
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT TH
C cuncil dces hereby find that :
D? 83-20
1 The variance request , if approved, would give the applicant a
)
special privilege not enjoyed by others in the same Zoning
District , that special privilege being a room addition in a
required yard area; to lot size,
2 ) There are no unuruto o circumstances t relating with mcCartney' s
configuration, o P g
property;
3 ) if the permits had been applied for, the room addition would
never. have been constructed_
RESOLVED •that`=the~Dublin -City ..Council' does
BE IT FURTHER R _ - ' - --
hereby deny said appeal
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this l3th day of
ffPOASSED, .��
August, . . .. �:,=: " :�.:":.:..
AYES : Councilmembers Hegarty, Jeffery, Moffatt and Mayor Snyder
NOES: None
ABSENT : Councilmember Vonheeder
Mavoa
ATTEST
�2-a'L C,
city Clerk
p� 83-2a
CITY OF DUBLIN
P.O. Bo% 2340 (415) 829-4600
Dublin, CA 94568
August 24 , 1984
CERTIFIED MAIL
William McCartney
7650 Canterbury Court
Dublin, CA 94568
RE: PA 83-060
The City Council at the August 13 , 1984 , meeting denied your
request for a variance to reduce the rear yard on your property
from 20 feet to 5 1/2 feet, in order to allow' the room recently
constructed to remain as is .
In connection with your application for a variance, the planning
staff identifies four options which would be acceptable, subject
to field verification of actual dimensions. The options are as
follows :
1 . A room addition of approximately 21 feet, 8 inches by 8
feet.
2 . A room addition of approximately 17 feet, , 9 inches by
10 feet.
3 . Change the existing room addition to an open patio
structure .
4 . Remove the structure .
You are hereby requested to secure for a permit to alter the room
so as to conform to options 1 through 3, by September 7, 1984,
and begin necessary work by September 17, 1984, or begin
demolition by September 17 , 1984 .
In order to get a permit it will be necessary for you to submit
complete accurate plans showing the proposed work. If a permit
is not secured by the time specified, or work is not started as
specified and deligently pursued, legal action will be initiated
to compel you to comply with the zoning ordinance by removal of
the room.
Thank you for your cooperation .
i
VICTOR L. TaUGHER
BUILDING OF-ICIAL
cf
ORDINANCE N0. 09-84
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
AMENDING ARTICLE 9 OF PART I OF CHAPTER 2
OF TITLE 8 AND RELATING TO ZONING ENFORCEMENT _
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. AMENDMENTS
(a) Section 8-106 .3 of Article 9 I, - -
chapter 2 , ' Title 8 of the Alameda County Ordinance ;Code
previously adopted by the City of Dublin is amended .to read as
follows:
" Section 8-106 .3 . DUTY OF CITY -ATTORNEY.
Any building or structure set up,
erected, constructed, altered, enlarged, 7.
converted, moved or maintained contrary to this
Chapter or any use of any land, building or
premises established, conducted, operated or
maintained contrary to -this Chapter is unlawful
and is hereby declared to be a public nuisance
and the City Attorney of the City shall, upon
order of the City Council, immediately commence
action or proceedings for the abatement and
removal and enjoin thereof in the manner
provided by l.aw and shall take such other steps
and shall apply to the court or courts as may
have jurisdiction to grant the relief which _
will abate and remove the building or
structures, and restrain and enjoin any person,
firm, or corporation from setting up, erecting,
building, or maintaining or using the building
or structure or any property Contrary to the
provisions of this Chapter. "
(b) Section 8-106 .4 is added to Article 9 , Part I,
Chapter 2 , Title 8 of the Alameda County Ordinance -Code - . ---
previously adopted by the City of Dublin to read as follows:
" Section 8-106 .4 . ATTORNEYS FEES AND LEGAL
COSTS A LIEN.
In the event that the City
an action in court for the relief s ; ! ,
the preceding paragraph (a) , the at
fees and court costs incurred by th,
the prosecution of such an action sl `;'
a lien against the property on which said
nuisance is maintained. "
(c) Section 8-106 .5 is added to Article 9 , Part I,
' Chapter 2 , Titleed by the Alameda County
Dublin Code •
previously adopt y -
" Section 8-106 .5 . NOTICE OF ASSESSMENT
HEARING.
upon the filing of the report of the
Building Official regarding attorneys' fees and
court costs, the City Clerk shall, by
resolution, fix a time, date and place when it
will hear and pass upon the ':'report, -..together
with any objections or protests which may be _
raised by any property owner liable to be
assessed for attorneys'r,fees and ;court costs
Ti
and any other interested Peet for the lea t te.
(10) days before the date s
the Building Official shall cause copies of his
report and notice of the filing of his report
and of the time, place and date when the
Council will hear and pass on the report, any
protests or objections e h L
manneranduponothe poroperty
and served in . th
owner, tenant or other interested party. "
(d) Section 8-106 .6 is added to Article 9 , Part I,
Chapter 2 , Title 8 of the Alameda County Ordinance Code
previously adopted by the City of Dublin to read as follows :
" Section 8-106 .6 . ASSESSMENT HEARING.
Any person interested in or affected
by the proposed assessment may file written
protests or objections with the City Clerk at
any time prior to the hour set for the hearing _
on the report of the Building Official. Each .
such protest or objection must contain a
description of the property in which the signer
thereof is interested and the grounds of each
protest or objection.
upon the day and hour fixed for the
hearing, the Council shall hear and pass upon
the report of the Building Official, together
with any objections or protests which may be
raised by any of the property owners liable to
be assessed for the attorneys' fees and court
-2-
costs, and any other interested persons. The
Council may make such revisions, correctons, or
modifications of the report as it may deem
just, and the report as submitted or as
revised, corrected or modified, together with
the assessment shall be confirmed by
resolution. The decision of the Council on the
report and the assessment and all protests or
objections thereto shall be final and
conclusive. "
(e) Section 8-106 .7 is added to Article 9 , Part I,
Chapter 2 , Title 8 of the Alameda County Ordinance 'Code
previously adopted by the City of Dublin 'to read as -follows: .
" Section 8-106 .7 . _ ASSESSMENT OF ATTORNEYS'
FEES AND COSTS AGAINST - . -
' PROPERTY: : •LIEN.
The attorneys' fees and court costs,
as confirmed by the Council, shall constitute a - •
special assessment against 'the property
involved, and as thus made and confirmed shall
constitute a lien on said property for the
amount of such assessment until paid. . Such
lien shall , for all purposes, be upon a parity
with the lien of State,: County and City taxes. "
(f) Section 8-106 .8 is added to Article 9 , Part I,
Cha,pter 2 , Title 8 of the Alameda County Ordinance Code .
previously adopted by the City of Dublin to read as follows:
" Section 8-106 .8 . COLLECTION.
On or before August 10 of the year in
which a special assessment is confirmed by the
Council , the City Clerk shall cause a certified
copy of said special assessment to be filed
with the County Assessor and County Tax
Collector. The description of the parcel
reported shall be that used for the same parcel : -. . .-
on the County Assessor' s map books for the _
current year.
The amount of the assessment shall be
collected at the same time and in the same
manner as ordinary municipal taxes are
collected, and shall be subject to the same
penalties and procedure and sale in case of
delinquency as provided for ordinary municipal
tastes. All laws and ordinances apolicable to
-3-
the levy, collection and enforcement of City
taxes are hereby made applicable to such
special assessment. "
Section 2 . POSTING OF ORDINANCE
The City Clerk of City
threes (3)shall
public
cause this Ordinance to be post e
places in the City of
of e State of California
Dublin in Section 36933 of
the Government Cod
e PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City. of:. _ .
Dublin on this 23rd day of April, 1984 ,".by the -follow votes: : :' .: .:
AYES: Councilmembers Hegarty, ' Jeffery, Moffatt," .
vonheeder and Mayor Snyder -
NOES: None
ABSENT: None -
Mayor G�
ATTEST:
City Clerk
-4-
APP NG OF PA84-043
ZONING ORDINANC 1ENDMENT REGARDING ARTS & CRAFTS FAIRS
and waivea eading and introduced and ordinance amending the zoning
ordi regarding arts & crafts fairs .
ABATEMENT OF ZONING VIOLATION
7650 CANTERBURY COURT
On September 14 , 1983 it was noted that construction work was being done on
the building at 7650 Canterbury Court without a permit . Subsequently the
applicant applied for a variance to permit a reduction of the rear yard so as
to allow the addition to the rear of the building to remain . The variance
request was denied by the Planning Commission and the City Council .
On August 24 , 1984 Mr . McCartney was requested to secure a permit to revise
the room or to remove it . As of this date, nothing has been done .
Mr . Lawrence McCartney, property owner , addressed the Council and stated he
was out of the Country and never received any of the mail related to the
violations . Mr . McCartney stated his contractor had been arrested on a drunk
driving charge , and had basically abandoned the project , leaving him out
several thousand dollars .
Staff produced several receipts signed by Mrs . McCartney, and the C1-
Attorney explained that because California is a community properzy sate ,
the various notices, letters , etc.
i�irs . McCartney could sign for
Mr . Sanchez , one of [sir . McCartney ' s neighbors addressed the Council and
stated the illegal building had been on the back of the property for 20 years
and he did not understand why all of a sudden it was illegal .
Cm. Moffatt felt the property owner has recourse with the contractor rather
than the City, because of the contractor ' s failure to obtain a building
permit for the room.
The City Attorney explained to Mr . McCartney several possible avenues which
he might want to pursue . A lot line adjustment could possibly bring this
addition into conformance , if there was adequate room and Mr . McCartney ' s
neighbor concurred . Because of the relatively short time since Mr . McCartney
purchased the property, he could possibly have some recourse against the real
estate company who sold him the property. The City Attorney advised Mr .
McCartney that he should seek legal counsel in the matter .
Following discussion, on motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder ,
and by unanimous vote (Cm. Jeffery absent ) , the Council agreed to continue
the abatement proceedings until November 26 , 1984 in order to allow mir .
McCartney sufficient time to pursue possible remedies to the situation .
:M-3-218
ATTAC E�� T. October 8, 1984